Log in
This case study focuses on the development of the European Union (EU) as a global political/security actor, particularly regarding the dynamic relationship between institution-building, strategic thinking, and policy performance. The impact involves the influence of Professor Michael E. Smith's research on EU foreign/security policy on current policy debates about the EU's future as a global actor, and on the broader issue of the EU's purpose in world politics. The EU is currently considering ideas about how to reform its ambitions in this area in light of the 2009 Treaty of Lisbon, providing a major opportunity for Smith's work to have an impact.
The research:
1.1 was used in EU negotiations on EU Directives on procedural rights for suspects and defendants as the `leading study in the field' to address deficiencies in existing mechanisms;
1.2 informed the training of more than 250 judges, prosecutors and lawyers from at least 23 EU member states regarding respect for and implementation of procedural rights;
1.3 provided a template used by NGOs in other regions in their investigations of procedural rights in practice; these include a consortium of NGOs in six Latin America countries who are using it in order to produce positive changes in regulation and practice.
The global financial crisis led the European Union (EU) to diversify its sources for the EU Budget, including co-financing instruments with multilateral development banks. Dr Robinson's research addressed key concerns about financial risk and the lack of transparency created through such partnerships. His research has been recognised as improving the understanding of these complex instruments within EU institutions and its impact may be measured through the implementation of several of its key recommendations. These include the creation of the `EBRD Representative for EU affairs' within a participating bank, the acceleration of EU co-financing strategy, and the unprecedented action of the EU Court of Auditors including the banks in their auditing process.
This research on European cooperation on armaments and homeland security technologies policy has informed discussions within the defence and security policy community. It has enhanced understanding of the most important requirements and conditions for successful cooperation among key defence and security policy actors, including European armaments directors, European parliamentarians and leading think tanks in several European countries. As a result, it significantly shaped debates that led to European Union (EU) policy on the pooling of military resources. It has also been used to inform policy-makers in several countries about the likely effects of EU armaments policy on the defence industry in Europe. Finally, it is being used by non-governmental organisations to inform their campaigns for the introduction of export controls on homeland security technologies.
This case-study is based upon research by Prof Michael Dougan and Dr Michael Gordon (both members of the Liverpool European Law Unit) undertaken between 2008 and 2013. That work critically assesses a series of interlinked EU constitutional reforms, and their impact upon the EU's relationship to its Member States, with particular reference to the UK experience: first, the interpretation and implementation of the Lisbon Treaty 2007; secondly, the design and implications of the European Union Act 2011; thirdly, Britain's legal and political reception of the 2012 "Fiscal Compact" Treaty. The research's principal impacts have occurred within the period 1 January 2008 to 31 July 2013. They consist in providing a wide range of high-level institutional actors (including the European Court of Justice, the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office and the House of Commons) with an objective and thorough critical evaluation of those major constitutional developments, so as directly to inform and assist their policy deliberations (including specific recommendations based directly on the research) on issues of fundamental importance to the future interests of the EU and the UK.
Professor Martin Dangerfield's research has focused on subregional cooperation in post-Cold War Europe with special emphasis on interactions with broader European integration processes. Its significance was acknowledged by policy-making communities at national, subregional and EU level. Dangerfield was appointed to advisory roles in events that both debated and informed public policy and enhanced public awareness. These concerned multilateral foreign policy cooperation of new EU members, namely the Visegrad Group (VG), and conception, design and implementation of a major EU initiative — the `Macro-Regional Strategy'. Dangerfield's work has also been cited widely in relevant non-academic publications produced for policy analysis and to deliver recommendations.
Research on the management and implementation of EU Cohesion policy has informed the legislative proposals made in 2011 by the European Commission for the reform of Cohesion policy. It has also influenced some organisational changes within the Commission introduced in early 2013. EU Cohesion policy is the second largest area of expenditure in the EU budget, currently worth c. €347bn for the 2007-13 period, and provides funding for regional socio-economic development programmes in all EU Member States. The legislative proposals influenced by the Strathclyde research affect every national, regional and local authority in the EU benefiting from EU Structural and Cohesion Funds.
European Union (EU)-Middle East relations are of critical importance to policy-makers, and this case study shows how Professor Richard Youngs' research has changed perspectives and practices among EU elites, informed debates among practitioner groups and shaped public debate about democracy promotion and human rights. As both Professor of Politics at Warwick and Director General of the Madrid-based think-tank FRIDE, Youngs' research findings have challenged conventional wisdom on: the prospects for democratisation in the Arab world; the identities of Islamist interlocutors; and the efficacy of civil society support. The influence of Youngs' research can be observed directly through the numerous commissions he has received from the European Parliament and the uptake of his subsequent reports among key stakeholders.
Research on participation in governance and related policy instruments, with a particular focus on interest organisations and groups, with strategic orientation of research publications towards impact, and evidence of use at the highest level in public policy reviews and public discourse/debate, as well as deliberations of advocacy groups.
Work carried out by Stalford and Drywood at the Liverpool Law School between 2008 and 2012 has been at the forefront of EU action in the field of children's rights. It has provided the blue-print for a coherent approach to the development, monitoring and evaluation of children's rights at European level. In doing so, it has directly influenced the way in which laws and policies are formulated by the European institutions, towards more explicit, meaningful engagement with children.
In addition to the longer term benefits for children of more responsive laws and policies at EU level, the research cited in this case study has reached a wide range of beneficiaries, encompassing the EU institutions and agencies, the international legal community and the NGO sector. In particular, the authors' comprehensive development of a detailed set of EU children's rights indicators and child rights mainstreaming methodology have been endorsed by the European institutions and NGO sector as mechanisms central to monitoring the compatibility of European measures with international children's rights obligations. The extent to which these processes enhance the EU's legal and policy responses to specific children's rights issues is already evident in the development of EU child protection measures and in negotiations with States wishing to join the EU.