<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>OAR@UM Collection:</title>
    <link>https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/52163</link>
    <description />
    <pubDate>Fri, 10 Apr 2026 16:20:50 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:date>2026-04-10T16:20:50Z</dc:date>
    
    <item>
      <title>The future of the European Union : demisting the debate</title>
      <link>https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/52313</link>
      <description>Title: The future of the European Union : demisting the debate
Authors: Harwood, Mark; Moncada, Stefano; Pace, Roderick
Abstract: Does Europe have a collective future, or will the coming years be marked by&#xD;
increasingly incoherent developments within the heterogeneous EU? There is no&#xD;
denying that the second decade of this century has seen a strong mood shift away&#xD;
from the inter-dependence and concerted actions that guided Europe’s national&#xD;
governments since the end of World War II, and then since the fall of the Berlin Wall.&#xD;
What connections, if any, are there between the paroxysms of Brexit in the UK and&#xD;
the varying shades of populism in continental Europe? The common denominator&#xD;
may simply be the painful economic pressures resulting from waning global&#xD;
competitiveness.&#xD;
It is clear that the high ideals of the European project no longer exert the same&#xD;
political pull. The EU’s dreams of progressing almost seamlessly from a trading zone&#xD;
to a shared political economy are not being realised. Where are the convergence&#xD;
policies that would exert centripetal rather than centrifugal forces? Where is the&#xD;
appetite for reforms leading to political union, and whatever happened to the idea of&#xD;
Europeans speaking with one voice?&#xD;
If the EU continues along its present path, the verdict of history may well be that&#xD;
it achieved little more than the welter of regulations needed to ensure trade flows. In&#xD;
geopolitical terms, Europe as a major player on the world stage may have been an&#xD;
illusion largely created by aggregating national statistics.</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 01 Jan 2020 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/52313</guid>
      <dc:date>2020-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>EU integration and policy (in)coherence towards irregular migration</title>
      <link>https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/52312</link>
      <description>Title: EU integration and policy (in)coherence towards irregular migration
Authors: Petroni, Nadia
Abstract: Irregular migration in the European Union (EU) dominates the current EU political&#xD;
agenda. It is also the top concern of European citizens, according to the latest&#xD;
Standard Eurobarometer (Spring 2019).38 EU member states, however, are not affected&#xD;
to the same degree, resulting in political friction with regard to how to deal with the&#xD;
challenges of this phenomenon. Furthermore, the EU’s failure to provide an adequate&#xD;
and unitary response to the unprecedented influx of irregular migrants in 2015&#xD;
exposed the strength of state sovereignty within member states and led to divisions&#xD;
within the EU so far as to threaten the overall functioning of the Schengen Area. As&#xD;
a result, the EU approach to irregular migration shows clear signs of following an&#xD;
intergovernmental logic of cooperation, where the supranational institutions have&#xD;
a lesser role leaving member states in the Justice and Home Affairs (JHA) Council&#xD;
in the driving seat. Nonetheless, there is an apparent paradox: EU institutions and&#xD;
member states are more divided than ever over a common approach to irregular&#xD;
migration, yet at the same time they are increasingly converging towards more&#xD;
restrictive migration policies.</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 01 Jan 2020 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/52312</guid>
      <dc:date>2020-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>The steps from Dublin III to Dublin IV</title>
      <link>https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/52311</link>
      <description>Title: The steps from Dublin III to Dublin IV
Authors: Matera, Amelia Martha
Abstract: In 1992, the EU established the Common European Asylum System, which is based&#xD;
on five central directives one of which is the Dublin regulation. The debate about a&#xD;
possible Dublin IV regulation started a long time ago, but the discrepancies among&#xD;
the member states’ interests are huge and it is hard to find a compromise. In fact,&#xD;
since the third and last update in 2013, there have not been any further changes.&#xD;
However, all parties agree that there is a need of reform and that the current system&#xD;
is unfair and inefficient. This paper wants to highlight future possible scenarios. The&#xD;
Commission presented a proposal in 2016 to reform the whole CEAS, which included&#xD;
a proposal for Dublin IV. The European Parliament had already adopted a position on&#xD;
the proposal of 2016, while the Council did not. The first part of the paper is dedicated&#xD;
to the current situation and to the reasons why the Regulation needs reform. The&#xD;
second section analyses the Proposal submitted by the Commission in 2016, and the&#xD;
related problems and reasons why this Proposal has not been agreed upon. Before&#xD;
reaching the conclusion, the third section explores possible alternatives of the&#xD;
Regulation’s future. It is difficult to say what will happen; theseare all hypothetical&#xD;
scenarios. However, it is fundamental to deeply analyse the suggestions proposed so&#xD;
far with regard to an eventual reform of the current regulation.</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 01 Jan 2020 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/52311</guid>
      <dc:date>2020-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Towards a ‘Cyber Maastricht’ : two steps forward, one step back</title>
      <link>https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/52310</link>
      <description>Title: Towards a ‘Cyber Maastricht’ : two steps forward, one step back
Authors: Kasper, Agnes; Vernygora, Vlad Alex
Abstract: This chapter evaluates the EU’s cybersecurity policy from four perspectives –&#xD;
neofunctionalism, liberal intergovernmentalism, post-functionalism, and the&#xD;
imperial paradigm. A search for a theory-based framework is performed to ensure&#xD;
that the analysis in this chapter is completed within a set of boundaries, and does&#xD;
not stray into speculation about the EU’s prospective strategic steps. Using this&#xD;
contribution’s findings and elaborations, a proposal on the policy-associated model is&#xD;
made. Having observed the empirical data, while analytically reflecting on actuality,&#xD;
it can be argued that a ‘Cyber Maastricht’ is long overdue.</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 01 Jan 2020 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/52310</guid>
      <dc:date>2020-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

