For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Carla Sousa.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item.
It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about. We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form. If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services. Economic literature: papers , articles , software , chapters , books.
Nationality or EU citizenship is the last step in this process. For such long-term residents, the added value of citizenship is limited from a practical perspective. Studies in Germany show that many migrants with a secure status do not even bother to apply for nationality even though they would fulfil the requirements for naturalisation. It has existed for many years in most jurisdictions and coincided, in countries like Germany , with restrictive ius sanguinis rules. As a result, inspecting the naturalisation regime alone can give an incomplete and sometimes false impression of the immigration practice.
The same applies for Brexit: if you are concerned with a pragmatic solution securing the rights of EU citizens in the UK and of British nationals in the EU, there is no need to embark on a politically sensitive, procedurally complicated, and normatively loaded debate about the direct conferral of EU citizenship. To sum up, if academic observers are concerned with immigrant admission, residence security and equal treatment, nationality law often is a secondary side aspect, which needs to be complemented with closer inspection of immigration and asylum regulations.
These rules are highly complex and many of us shy away from studying them. But if the concern lies on practical effects, the academic debate cannot evade doing so. I do not claim that debates about citizenship and nationality are about practical effects only. Rather, the normative dimension seems to be the primary reason why academics and the broader public love discussing nationality law and EU citizenship.
Citizenship law can be a reflection of the collective self-perception of European societies and the European Union at large.
It allows to articulate normative visions about the direction to be taken. My own experience from the German context is that the same applies to domestic debates. Discussions about the ius soli and double nationality have limited effects for residence security or equal treatment, which third-country nationals acquire on the basis of long-term residence status anyway, but academics and the broader public embrace these debates nonetheless — and rightly so —since they serve as a projection sphere for how we define membership and identity.
It seems to me that the main added value of most citizenship debates is the symbolic dimension. It guides and reinforces changing self-perceptions of European societies, which welcome third-country nationals as equal members — an effect that technical rules on long-term residence status cannot bring about. Citizenship serves as a projection sphere for political visions of a good life and a just society and it was, in the case of the EU, a symbolic expression of the ambition to move towards some sort of federal Europe.
It defines much of the integration process, including the single market programme, the Charter of Fundamental Rights or the erstwhile project of a Constitutional Treaty. While some projects were successful, the Constitutional Treaty and the Brexit referendum remind us that Treaty changes, new legislation and innovative judgments alone cannot bring about an enhanced degree of identity and solidarity. Supranational citizenship law is thus not a self-fulfilling prophecy. That is not to say that the law or court judgments are irrelevant.
They express basic choices of societies and legal developments partake in the constant reconstruction of societal and individual self-perceptions. But the law and court judgments cannot change them single-handedly. This publication is the result of a study financed by the EU-LAC Foundation to analyse the impact of agricultural policies on food and nutrition security as well as on the food sovereignty of Latin America and the Caribbean LAC and the European Union The study analyses the Study on RIS3 approaches in 9 Latin American countries as a potential driver for cooperation with their European counterparts.
The objectives of this study are: i Taking stock of existing regional innovation strategies in 9 Latin American countries; ii Both regions also share a commitment to multilateralism and VAT N.
Journals Outline Studies. Would you like us to take another look at this review? Calls on the Council and the European Council to allow all countries that fulfil the necessary technical criteria to become members of the Schengen area, thereby allowing all EU citizens to enjoy freedom of movement unhindered by border checks;. While citizenship may remain nationally based, and indeed in the absence of a supranational state must remain so, it must also cease to be nationalist, for which purpose it must be brought under supranational regulation through the organized collectivity of European states, the European Union. Phil Parvin.
Follow us:. Cookies weigeren Cookies toestaan.
Publications As part of its activities to promote the debate on common strategies related to the EU-LAC bi-regional association, the Foundation carries out research and studies on issues identified by both regions. Subscribe to Publications List.
Publications Enter terms.