Academic literature on the topic 'Raad van State'

This study aims at explaining the factors that influenced and shaped European Union (EU) member states’ negotiation behaviour and strategies in the Council of the EU, in particular in the case of the recast Asylum Procedures Directive (APD). Based on a series of interviews with officials of member states and EU institutions, this research suggests that the Council negotiations in the post-Lisbon Treaty period are better explained through an institutionalist lens. Previous scholarship has shown that issue-salience along with regulatory expertise and administrative capacity was important to understand negotiation behaviour, bargaining success and policy output during the first phase of the Common European Asylum System (CEAS). However, this study demonstrates that these variables are no longer sufficient to fully explain member states´ negotiation behaviour in the second and third phase of the CEAS. Thus, based on the actor-centered institutionalism framework (ACI), this study proposes a bargaining model that not only considers issue-salience, but also formal and informal institutional rules such as voting rule, consensus norm, ´co-decision´ and the type of legal instrument, as explanatory variables for the observed ´mixed-motive game´ in the Council. Furthermore, this research argues that the commonly used typologies on EU negotiations literature do not sufficiently portray the dynamic in the APD. It is not just a matter of bargaining strategies to maximise member states´ self-interest, nor just the search for creative joint solutions to the problems. Rather, there is a coexistence of both conflict and cooperation, in which self-interested actors accommodate joint solutions to obtain a non-zero-sum game. To sum up, actors are still perceived as rational, who seek to maximise their self-interests. Yet their course of action and behaviour are constrained by the EU institutional setting.
Deze studie richt zich op het verklaren van de factoren die het onderhandelingsgedrag en de strategieën van de Europese Unie (EU) lidstaten in de Raad van de EU hebben beïnvloed en vormgegeven, met name in het geval van de herziene Richtlijn voor Asielprocedures. Gebaseerd op een serie interviews met ambtenaren van de lidstaten en de EU-instellingen, suggereert dit onderzoek dat de onderhandelingen van de Raad in de periode na het Verdrag van Lissabon beter worden toegelicht door middel van een Institutionalistische lens. Eerdere wetenschappelijke studies hebben aangetoond dat kwestie-saillantie samen met regelgevende expertise en bestuurlijke capaciteit was belangrijk om de onderhandelingsgedrag te begrijpen, succes te onderhandelingen en beleidsresultaten te leveren tijdens de eerste fase van het Gemeenschappelijk Europees Asielstelsel. Deze studie toont echter aan dat deze variabelen niet langer voldoende zijn om het onderhandelingen gedrag van de lidstaten in de tweede en derde fase van het CEAS uit te leggen. Dus, op basis van de acteur-gecentreerde institutionalisme kader, stelt deze studie een onderhandelingspositie model dat niet alleen rekening houden met kwestie-saillantie, maar ook formele en informele institutionele regels zoals stemregel, consensus norm, “medebeslissingsprocedure” en het type van juridisch instrument, als verklarende variabelen voor de waargenomen “gemengd-motief spel” in de Raad. Bovendien, selt dit onderzoek dat de meest gebruikte typologieën op EU-onderhandelingen literatuur onvoldoende beeld van de dynamiek in de APD geven. Het is niet alleen een kwestie van onderhandelen strategieën om het eigenbelang van de lidstaten te maximaliseren, noch alleen het zoeken naar creatieve oplossingen voor de problemen. Integendeel, er is een coëxistentie van zowel conflict en samenwerking, waarin zelf geïnteresseerde acteurs geschikt voor gezamenlijke oplossingen om een niet-nulsomspel te verkrijgen. Kortom, acteurs zijn nog steeds als rationeel gezien, die proberen om hun eigen belangen te maximaliseren. Toch, hun handelwijze en gedrag worden echter beperkt door het institutionele kader van de EU.
Este estudo tem como objetivo explicar os fatores que influenciaram e moldaram o comportamento e estratégias de negociação dos Estados-membros da União Europeia (UE) no Conselho da UE, especificamente no caso da Diretiva de Procedimentos de Asilo adotada em 2013. Com base numa série de entrevistas conduzidas com as Representações Permanentes dos Estados-membros e Instituições da UE, esta investigação sugere que as negociações no Conselho após o Tratado de Lisboa são melhor explicadas através de uma lente institucionalista. Estudos anteriores demonstraram que a saliência do assunto, juntamente com a experiência regulatória e a capacidade administrativa dos Estados-Membros foram importantes para compreender o comportamento de negociação, o sucesso de negociação e o resultado da política durante a primeira fase do Sistema Europeu Comum de Asilo (SECA). No entanto, este estudo demonstra que estas variáveis já não são suficientes para explicar o comportamento de negociação dos Estados-membros na segunda e terceira fase do SECA. Desta forma, com base no actor-centered institutionalism framework (ACI), este estudo propõe um modelo de negociação que não só considera a saliência do assunto como também as regras formais e informais das instituições. Mais especificamente a regra de voto no Conselho, norma de consenso no Conselho, ´codecisão´ e o tipo de instrumento legal como variáveis explicativas para o ´mixed-motive game’ observado no Conselho. Ademais, esta investigação argumenta que as tipologias comumente utilizadas na literatura das negociações da UE não retratam suficientemente a dinâmica observada na diretiva em análise. Não se trata apenas de estratégias de negociação para maximizar o interesse dos Estados-membros, nem apenas a busca de soluções criativas para os problemas comuns. Mas sim uma coexistência de conflito e cooperação, na qual atores racionais acomodam soluções conjuntas para obter um jogo de soma não zero no Conselho. Em suma, os atores continuam a ser racionais, procurando maximizar seus interesses, no entanto, o seu curso de ação e comportamento são condicionados pelo contexto institucional da UE.

This dissertation is a historical biography of F.V. Engelenburg (1863-1938) and covers the period from 1889 to 1938, when Engelenburg lived and worked in South Africa. The study situates Engelenburg in the historical landscape of the Zuid-Afrikaansche Republiek during the late nineteenth and early twentieth century. The focus is mainly on Engelenburg’s journalistic career at De Volksstem, but attention is also given to his many other interests, including the development and promotion of Afrikaans and the Afrikaans academic culture, especially in the northern parts of South Africa. His work pertaining to the development of architecture, literature, aviation, the visual and performing arts, history, libraries, museums and educational institutions comes under the spotlight. His private life is considered as well in order to portray his versatility as a person. The chapters have been subdivided to highlight the variety of matters he was involved in, and a chronological approach has been followed as is customary in a biography. The study is based on archival research. In particular, Engelenburg’s private collections were used, as well as the private collections of some of his contemporaries. Engelenburg assumes a central place in the biography, with special focus on how he perceived and experienced conditions and everyday life in South Africa from the point of view of his transnational European background. His role as influential opinion-maker and political commentator on local and international politics is highlighted. His ties with political leaders and his involvement in government affairs are emphasised. The study also refers to his continued contact with his motherland, the Netherlands, and with the Dutch language. After the Anglo- Boer War, he realised that the languages of the future in South Africa would be Afrikaans (not Dutch), alongside English. His continuing support for Afrikaans as a language of instruction in schools and universities and the development of the Afrikaans literature, as well as his support for the standardization of Afrikaans helped to establish Afrikaans as an official language alongside English and Dutch in South Africa. Engelenburg’s active contribution to the work of the Zuid-Afrikaanse Akademie voor Taal, Lettere en Kuns (now the Suid- Afrikaanse Akademie vir Wetenskap en Kuns), helped to put the organization on a sound footing for future development. The Akademie can be seen as a living monument to his work in South Africa.
PhD (History)--North-West University, Vaal Triangle Campus, 2015.