No result found
Open Society Foundations;
The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union is a legally binding document that contains a list of human rights recognised by the European Union (EU). It could become a powerful tool available to influence policy makers or serve as a basis for litigation. Individuals can use judicial and political mechanisms to hold EU institutions, and in certain circumstances member countries, to account when they fail to comply with the Charter. The Charter can also be used to pressure decision makers to bring policies and legislation under development in line with human rights standards. This background paper explains when and how the Charter can be used by advocates at national and EU level.
The Pew Charitable Trusts;
Under the European Union's current Common Fisheries Policy (CFP), 2020 had been targeted as the year toachieve a major change in fisheries management: sustainable exploitation rates in place for all stocks. Despiteprogress, the EU did not meet this goal.The story of the policy's implementation begins in 2013, when, after decades of overfishing and ineffectivefisheries management, the European Parliament and the EU's then-28 member state governments agreed onfar-reaching reforms to the previous CFP.1 These included setting sustainable catch limits with the objective torestore stocks, maintain healthy ecosystems and safeguard stable, profitable fisheries for the EU fleet. In 2014,the reformed CFP entered into force, with a focus on bringing fishing pressure in line with scientific advice. Thepolicy required fisheries ministers to ensure sustainable exploitation rates "by 2015 where possible and on aprogressive, incremental basis at the latest by 2020 for all stocks."Now, after the 2020 deadline has passed, it's clear that the reforms have brought progress. But the data alsoshows that policymakers are still setting too many catch limits above the levels recommended by scientists, withdecision-making suffering from a short-term approach and lower ambition than the policy requires.In 2008, The Pew Charitable Trusts began working with 192 organisations in the OCEAN2012 coalition to ensurethat a reformed CFP set ambitious, science-based and achievable objectives. In the years since the reforms cameinto force, Pew and several other groups have pushed to hold decision-makers accountable in the efforts to endoverfishing in North-Western European waters and allow stocks to recover to healthy, productive levels.This report presents eight key lessons learned from this work to help implement the EU's fisheries policy, eachlesson augmented by a deeper look at a specific issue. The experiences in implementing the EU policy show that:1. Good management works.As the experience of fisheries managers around the world has shown, when steps are taken to safeguardthe sustainability of stocks and fisheries for the long term, the results include environmental, economicand social benefits.2. Decreased ambition since 2013 led to under-implementation.Decision-makers approached implementation of most major pillars of the CFP pragmatically, toooften showing less political will than needed to deliver the reforms as intended. This led to diminishedexpectations from stakeholders and EU institutions on what could be delivered, almost from the beginning.3. Decisions often favoured maintaining the status quo rather than changing behaviour.Despite ambitious CFP goals intended to change outcomes in the water, decision-makers often adjustedmanagement measures to fit existing patterns of fishing – to the detriment of achieving the objectives.4. EU decision-making remains siloed.Fisheries policy processes often follow their own internal logic, so a focus on fisheries yields and economicoutcomes may overlook other priorities, such as the urgent need to deliver on wider EU environmentalrequirements and commitments.5. Short-term thinking persists in EU management.A long-term perspective – one of the key aims of the 2014 CFP – often took a back seat to immediatepolitical expediency. For example, fisheries ministers continued to set excessive catch limits on the basisthat they were a "compromise" between short- and long-term aims or were necessary for unexplainedeconomic reasons. 6. Clarity on progress is too often undermined by unclear and inconsistent reporting.Rather than measuring progress against the aims of the CFP, official reporting often uses irrelevant orchanging benchmarks, such as trend comparisons, which frequently do not correspond to the CFP's legalobjectives. This confuses the public about the policy's progress and leads stakeholders to draw differentconclusions on priorities.7. Opaque decision-making hampers progress.A lack of public communication on the scientific basis for European Commission proposals onmanagement measures such as catch limits, and the rationale for legislators' subsequent decisions, toooften prevented scrutiny of decision-making by stakeholders and EU institutions, and undermined trust inthe process.8. Stocks shared with non-EU countries present challenges in achieving CFP aims.Jointly managed stocks require more complex decision-making than stocks that are managed by oneentity. That increases the need for collaborative improvements, especially in the wake of the UK'sdeparture from the EU.To realise the ambitions set by legislators in 2013, EU policymakers need to take the final steps to implementthe CFP in full. The health of marine ecosystems, European fisheries, and the communities that depend on themrequire the sustainable, ecosystem-based management approaches set out in the policy, without exceptions andloopholes. The findings in this review of progress can help guide decision-makers and stakeholders on the workthat remains to fully implement the CFP, and in shaping future priorities for European fisheries.
Tiny Beam Fund;
*Animal farming has intensified in Bulgaria and Romania (both are middle-income countries) in recent years. Many more animals are now reared in large farms that use intensive production practices, while the number of small farms have dwindled.*This report/Guidance Memo charts the significant shift toward intensification, and explains why its key driver is the EU Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). CAP payments and subsidies and their unequal distribution to recipients have triggered deep structural changes in the animal agriculture sector in the EU, chief of which is the livestock industry taking advantage of the favorable climate and generous handouts to intensify production.*At the same time EU animal welfare regulations are not robustly enforced and not comprehensive enough to protect all farm animals. Consumers in the EU, however, are strongly in favor of better treatment of farm animals.
To create the 2021 Ariadne Forecast, 275 Ariadne members and friends of the network filled in surveys, participated in interviews, and attended online forecast meetings to share their insights into trends in European social change and human rights philanthropy for 2021.The report looks at the challenges and opportunities this year might bring for grantees; how funder practice could change; which political events are likely to affect their work; what will become more important in the months ahead; and -- perhaps most importantly -- what to feel hopeful about. There are chapters on France, Germany, Italy, The Netherlands, and the UK, plus a broader, global focus.The challenges ahead may be great, but philanthropy can play a role in helping us overcome them.
Association of German Foundations;
This document seeks to demonstrate that the work of all community foundations is highly relevant to the SDGs and that by adopting a 'whole-of-organization approach' which takes into consideration mission, investment, strategies and programmes, communications and operations, there is scope to use the framework to enhance their role, credibility and effectiveness as catalysts for change. This can attract partners and funding, can motivate staff, board members and volunteers and can consolidate the position of the community foundation in its locality.
Donors and Foundations Networks in Europe (DAFNE);
This handbook provides practical guidance for Civil Society Organisations (CSOs) to advocate and litigate using EU law to protect their rights and civic space in the EU.It aims to be a user-friendly guide for CSOs who want to know::What EU law is and how it affects individuals and organisations;When and how CSOs can challenge national provisions or measures that impact their mission, activities and operations on the basis of EU law, including the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights (CFR);Which legal avenues and resources are available for CSOs to defend their civic space within the EU law frameworkA list of resources as well as practical tools can be found in the last part the document.
Charities Aid Foundation (CAF);
This paper consolidates the major elements of a discussion on European governments' policy responses to supporting civil society and facilitating philanthropy and individual giving in the context of the coronavirus pandemic.
European Foundation Centre (EFC);
The European Foundation Centre surveyed its members, affiliates and partners from March to early June 2020 to find out what immediate measures they were taking (or were planning to take), internally and in their programmatic and funding activities, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.The survey aimed to gain an initial overview of how EFC members and affiliates were reacting to the crisis in order to identify possible points of collaboration and synergy, and to share useful information among them.
European Foundation Centre (EFC);
This publication aims to raise awareness and promote the potential of European social economy enterprises and organisations in the inclusion of people with disabilities by sharing good practices which look at: employment, training and education, services and accessibility.The content of this guide is based on information and expertise provided and gathered by members of the Social Economy and Disability Working Group (SE&D) through consultation with the Social Economy Europe (SEE) member organisations and partners, as well as other relevant stakeholders in the field.
European Community Foundation Initiative;
Building an understanding of the shape and work of the community foundation field is important not only in raising awareness of its scale and scope, for those operating within it and those with an interest in local development, but also to inform further development of the field.In an exceptional year for all societies worldwide, ECFI has conducted its biennial assessment of the community foundation (CF) field in Europe. This report has been informed by a survey of community foundations support organisations (CFSOs) and intelligence gathered through our ongoing engagement with the field.This report provides a snapshot of the field, highlights changes and trends, and identifies some key issues relevant to its further development. There are reflections on the role that community foundations played in response to the Covid-19 pandemic, but also on how this impacted on the community foundations themselves, and how this has altered their thinking and strategies.The analysis of community foundations support organisations (CFSOs) differentiates them by type and shows how this essential part of the field has developed. The work of community foundations support organisations is described and there is a focus on two important areas – what they did differently following the outbreak of Covid-19, and how they are supporting the field in respect of embracing the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).Conclusions are drawn from the analysis of the field which will inform ECFI's work which aims to strengthen and promote the community foundation movement in Europe.
Open Society Foundations;
The Roma Early Childhood Inclusion (RECI) studies and reports aim to build a comprehensive and detailed picture of the extent of early childhood provision and services, available to Romani families. The studies have been carried out in five countries—Czech Republic, Hungary, Macedonia, Romania and Serbia—and endeavour to identify the major obstacles that Romani families face in accessing high-quality, socially inclusive, early childhood care and education. More generally, the studies and reports deliver data and information about communities that are often ignored or misrepresented by official statistics, government policies, ministerial strategies and plans for spending.As previous studies carried out by Open Society Foundations have shown—No Data—No Progress, 2010—the lack of reliable data hampers any attempt to measure the impact of government or international NGO intervention. Planning services and allocating resources to Romani communities are the consequence of "guesswork" rather than knowledge and careful study. The Roma Early Childhood Inclusion reports present a distillation of the most recent and reliable data to be had, in these circumstances, drawn from the actual communities themselves, through interviews and focus groups. Government strategies, policies and action plans are all assessed in this context; what has been the effect of the initiatives aimed at improving the economic and social position for Romani families, in these countries?This Overview Report draws upon data from the five country studies, carried out by Romani and non-Romani researchers working together, to present what are the themes and topics of most relevance to families and young children in settlements and neighbourhoods across central, eastern and south-eastern Europe. A profound lack of equality of access and services, beset by numerous obstacles, characterizes the overall picture, for Roma. The numbers of Romani children that have access to good quality, early childhood education and care provision or who can participate in community and home-based learning programmes, remains minimal in comparison with the surrounding, majority populations.The desperate need for Romani children to be able to access, at least for two years, high-quality, socially inclusive, early childhood education and care services and benefit from effective home visiting and community-based early childhood development (ECD) programmes, is a particular theme throughout the report. This is a minimum requirement that the partner organizations (UNICEF, Open Society Foundation's Early Childhood Program and Roma Education Fund) advocate for at national and international levels, if progress is to be made in improving education outcomes for Romani children.The scale of the changes that need to be undertaken in order to provide equal opportunity for Romani children and families requires that national governments and international institutions (such as the Council of Europe, the European Commission and the European Union's Parliament) act, following the recommendations that these reports deliver.
Fondazione 1563 Per l'Arte e la Cultura della Compagnia di San Paolo;
The papers included in this volume are a selection of those presented at a joint eabh and Fondazione 1563 conference in 2018 in Turin, Italy. The conference sought to expand upon research in the field of social responsibility and ethical finance and saw over 150 attendees examine the connections between banking and charity, ethics and profit and explore case studies of financial from across the world.Papers ranged from Italian Monte di Pietà in the Middle Ages to the recent advent of contemporary impact financing, from rural moneylenders in Western India to the mutualism of French agricultural credit, from the Swedish savings banks and the British building societies to the German and Dutch Raiffeisen banks, from Rothschild philanthropy to the public economic and social aspects of the Italian banking system, from the Spanish bank archives to those in Canada and South Africa. Each paper ends with a list of bibliographical references.