pdf -il-ruolo-del-discorso-psicoanalitico-nel-trattamento-delle-nuove- T+ benchmarking-best-. .. http://testnet0. T+ io/ :// .. T+ .
|Country:||Sao Tome and Principe|
|Published (Last):||19 May 2014|
|PDF File Size:||20.77 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||14.56 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Procedural issues and consultation of interested parties. Identification, Organisation and Timing. Accessibility in the European Disability Strategy. The issues of fragmentation and barriers in the internal market. Nature and scale of the problem.
Some concrete examples of legislative divergence leading to market fragmentation. Current situation and evolution of the nenchmarking in the baseline scenario. Effects of the problem – Who is affected? Financial impacts on economic operators and public sector bodies. Social and quality of life impacts on consumers i.
The EU’s right to act and EU added-value. Legal right to amministrazjone.filetype. Impact on Fundamental Rights. Compliance with the principle of subsidiarity. Compliance with the principle of proportionality. Consistency with other EU policies. Consistency with the on-going standardisation processes.
Consistency with international developments, in particular focusing on the US. Common elements of the legislative policy options.
Overall approach of the economic analysis. No new action at EU level baseline scenario. EU Recommendation defining common accessibility requirements for the selected goods and services. EU Directive defining common accessibility requirements for the benchmaeking goods and services – immediately applicable to all Member States. The case of SMEs and micro-enterprises. Comparison of Policy Options.
Monitoring and evaluation arrangements. Impact assessment on Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to accessibility requirements of goods and services. There is a divergence of national accessibility requirements related to goods and services placed and provided in the EU market and related to public procurement specifications, which leads to a fragmentation of the internal market.
The general nature of the UNCRPD’s accessibility obligations leads both to diverging national implementation and further legal divergence, in the EU market especially for Computers and Operating Systems; Digital TV services and equipment; Telephony services and related terminal equipment; eBooks; Self-service terminals; eCommerce; Banking services concerning ATMs, websites and built-environment ; Passenger transport services – Air, Rail, Bus and Maritime concerning ticketing and check-in machines, websites and built-environment ; Hospitality services concerning websites and built-environment.
The legal divergence and related internal market problems in the area of public procurement and other EU law setting a general accessibility obligation are also expected to increase now that the current optional accessibility requirements have become compulsory with the entering into force of the revised Public Procurement Directives. Those laws do not specify accessibility and what it entails, leaving this aspect to sector-specific rules and consequently increase the risk of further fragmentation at national and even lower levels.
What is this initiative amministfazione.filetype to achieve? The general objectives of this initiative are to improve the functioning of the internal market of specific accessible goods and services, while facilitating the work for industry and serving the needs of consumers, as well as to contribute to the goals of the Europe Strategy and the European Disability Strategy The specific objectives are to lower barriers to cross-border amminlstrazione.filetype and ammnistrazione.filetype competition in the selected goods and services and in the area of public procurement, as well as to facilitate access by consumers with disabilities to a wider amministrazione.filetypf of competitively priced accessible goods and services.
This will be achieved by operational objectives defining common EU accessibility requirements for selected goods and services and using the same requirements for public procurement, and by improving enforcement of accessibility requirements. What is the value added of action at the EU level? Only action at the EU level can create a harmonised and coherent legal framework that will allow the free circulation of accessible goods and services in the internal market.
This initiative will contribute to a coherent and effective implementation of the UN Convention across the EU facilitating Member States’ compliance with the above mentioned international commitments benefiting industry and consumers.
This action at EU level would respect the principle of proportionality by leaving to Member States the freedom to define ‘how to achieve common objectives’, taking into account national circumstances with flexibility for ‘when to do it’.
EUR-Lex – SC – EN – EUR-Lex
What legislative and non-legislative policy options have been considered? Is there a preferred choice or not? An EU regulatory intervention leaving a certain margin of discretion to the Member States as to its implementation appears to be efficient amministraziome.filetype tackle the actual and upcoming problems of the functioning of the internal market. A Directive would be in line with nelal approach taken in previous Commission Communications and instruments and will ensure the free movement of the identified accessible goods and services without going beyond what is necessary in order to achieve that objective.
Discarded policy options were: The 4 following options have been retained for consideration: No further action at EU level baseline scenario. EU Recommendation defining common accessibility requirements for the selected goods and services, as well as in the area of ;ubblica procurement.
EU Directive defining common accessibility requirements amministrazione.riletype the selected goods and services as well as in the area of public procurement – applicable to the Member States when they regulate on accessibility. EU Directive defining common accessibility requirements for the amminisgrazione.filetype goods and services, as well as in the area of public procurement — immediately applicable to all Member States.
In a public consultation, industry representatives strongly supported EU public procurement rules on accessibility. Options 3 and 4 will best address the main drivers of the problem and consequently would improve the functioning of the internal market.
The differences in the impacts of those two policy options mainly relate to the degree of effectiveness, the related costs savings, and their justification in line with the principle of proportionality.
EUR-Lex Access to European Union law
Option 3 appears to be the less costly and to be more proportional to the objectives. Option 4 would have the biggest impact for the harmonisation of the internal market and would have greater social impacts but it would also be more expensive.
Both legal options would benefit from standards for their implementation. The administrative burden will be higher for option 4 than for option 3 because it would cover Member States without current additional legislation on accessibility. Overall, both options 3 and 4 are expected to reduce costs for industry by eliminating and preventing the fragmentation of the internal market when Member States regulate accessibility. The requirement to provide information about accessibility of the selected goods and services will however have additional administrative costs.
In any case cost savings compared with the baseline scenario are much more important for both options. There are anticipated social and economic benefits resulting from improvements in the functioning of the internal market while environmental impacts are very small. How will businesses, SMEs and micro-enterprises be affected?
The positive impact of the envisaged options on all economic operators is comparable irrespective of their size. With respect to micro and SMEs, these effects may even be more accentuated since the cost savings resulting from the enhanced legal clarity and common EU accessibility rules would make it much easier for them to follow and respect all accessibility requirements in the EU.
As regards possible negative impacts, it did not appear in the impact assessment that the overall impact of this policy action would bring about significant costs increases for SMEs as well as other economic operators.
Safeguard clauses will be used to ensure proportionality of the requirements for the companies, in particular SMEs and micro enterprises. By improving the functioning of the internal market of specific accessible goods and services, the integration into society of people with disabilities and older people will be facilitated increasing their active participation for example in terms of education and employment consequently reducing their risk of poverty.
The proposal is expected to strengthen fundamental rights, including the right to human dignity, the rights of the elderly and the right to integration of persons with disabilities.
By replacing several national accessibility requirements with a single set of EU requirements, the overall legislative landscape should be simplified.
This will moreover reduce costs to industry in comparison with the baseline and therefore be beneficial for competitiveness. A review is to be performed five years after the entry into application of the Directive.
After resubmission on 4 Junea positive opinion was issued on 9 July The revised report takes on board the recommendations of the IAB and introduces the following main modifications and clarifications: Additional examples were provided adding evidence to substantiate the internal market problems deriving from the fragmentation. Additional information is provided on the Member Ebnchmarking obligations on accessibility under the UN Convention and its implications for the fragmentation of the internal market.
Recent clarification from the UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in relation to those obligations has been included. In particular, clarification on the voluntary role of European standards and their limited effect to prevent the divergence of national legislation. Further explanations have been provided to clarify the relation and the scope of the intended measures in comparison with the obligations arising from the UN Convention.
The methodology used for the calculations has been further explained. Ranges have been used to better qualify the impacts. The justification for the inclusion of micro-enterprises in this initiative has been included.
Finally, stakeholders’ views have been more extensively referred to throughout the report. A wide range of studies were used to prepare this IA. A full list of the consulted studies is provided in Annex 1. The contractor carried out a significant number of interviews with economic operators in order to get data in particular about the costs of making their products accessible but they were not able to provide systematic costs information hence the amminustrazione.filetype for amministrazione.filetyep contractor to make estimations and approximations for the economic analysis.
Both studies together provide a comprehensive overview of the situation across the EU. Consultations and meetings have been carried out during and with a wide range of stakeholders, including representatives from Member States the High Level Group on Disability 4industry, accessibility experts and European civil society organisations.
A Eurobarometer on accessibility was benchmarkiing out in March and collected the views of 25 Europeans.
Two-thirds of respondents say that they would buy, or pay more for goods and services if they were benchmxrking accessible and better designed for all. Four out of five respondents agreed that having common rules on accessibility at EU-level would make it easier for companies to operate in another EU country, therefore boosting cross-border trade and enhancing competition.
A public consultation was held from There were responses citizens and representatives of public and private sector organisations. The built environment, Information and Communication Technologies ICTand transport were identified as the most problematic areas focusing on their use in some key services. Industry representatives indicated that EU action in this area should include a link to EU public procurement rules, because different accessibility requirements and legislation at different administration and sector levels hinders the functioning of the internal market.
The companies were asked to provide information about how accessibility is considered when providing goods and services, and estimates of the costs and benefits of accessible goods and services. The great majority of respondents were micro, small and medium enterprises. These measures are not seen as alternatives but as complementary, as they both contribute to improving the ability of SMEs to provide pubglica goods and services. Further details and findings from these consultations can be found in Annex 2 6.
The meeting provided additional input on possible measures to make goods and services more accessible in Europe. All participants supported the Commission’s goal of improving accessibility of goods and services in the EU by applying an Internal Market logic and in line with the UN Convention of the Rights amministrazionr.filetype Persons with Disabilities.