Digital Development of the European Union

This academic monograph focuses on the digital developments of the European Union. It consistently develops the theme of digital evolution in the EU at a crucial moment for the future organization from a multidisciplinary perspective. The book presents the main fields of digital development in the near future within the Union and has the participation of prestigious international authors in the chosen field. At a time of transformation in the model of society, digitization has seen its implementation accelerated by the recent COVID-19 pandemic. Therefore, understanding and promoting the correct digital development is a priority for scientific dissemination and for the interest of readers.

The European Union is a distinctive organization in the global arena. It integrates different areas of the Member States, forming a common sovereignty. The European building process focuses on the priorities of the actors involved, as citizens, institutions, and Member States. Parallel to new solutions, new problems are generated by the process and required new solutions. Presently digitalization is a priority that needs to be addressed. Consequently, the European Union focuses on the implementation of common actions ruling the digital aspects relevant to the organization. The following chapter focus on the digital priorities of the EU and the future solutions to the current problems offered by the process of digitalization.

The European Union’s cybersecurity policy spans across domains from electronic communications, payment services and fight against cybercrime to cyberdiplomacy and building cyber defence capabilities. While cybersecurity is a horizontal policy area, synergies among its parts are missing or incomplete and the related challenges are addressed in silos at the supranational EU level. Cybersecurity is linked to various other policy areas (often those at the heart of the single market), which are textbook cases of how integration in one functional area ‘spills over’ into another one, hence such dynamics of integration are well-explainable in terms of neofunctionalism. However, cybersecurity is also linked to issues within the areas of freedom, security and justice, as well as Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP), where ‘pure’ neofunctionalist explanations face significant constraints and the ‘failing forward’ framework was proposed by scholars to yield deeper and valuable insights. This chapter investigates the applicability of the ‘failing forward’ framework to the case of the EU’s cybersecurity policy by focusing on key regulatory instruments. For the discussion in this study the history of cybersecurity policy is divided into cyber eras of ‘cyber sleeping’, ‘cyber awakening’, ‘cyber reacting’ and ‘cyber powering’. The authors aim to chart the course of integration dynamics in cybersecurity policy throughout these eras, resulting in insights on efforts to advance synergies, and deepening and widening of integration in EU cybersecurity, and ultimately on shaping European integration.

This research offers a critical review of the relevance and influence of the liberalization of EU law concerning the online sale of pharmaceuticals in the context of transnational criminal law.

The Internet has enabled and accelerated the distribution of a class of drugs called substandard, spurious, falsely labeled, falsified, and counterfeit medicines (SSFFC) through online sales. This situation exposes many unsuspecting individuals to enormous public health risks. Both individuals and widespread criminal networks are involved. Both the buyers and the purveyors of illicit medications and pharmaceutical ingredients contribute to this problem. The liberalization of pharmaceutical sales in the digital marketplace has contributed to the growth of pharmaceutical crime and provided expedients through which criminal groups have circumvented liability.

Several steps would help mitigate these risks at national, regional, and international levels. These include improving control and verification mechanisms for the manufacture of pharmaceuticals and raw pharmaceutical materials supplied in the EU, toughening the penalties for criminal distribution of SSFFCs, and educating the population at large about their dangers.

The European Union policymakers are focused on establishing a well-suited environment for the digital future of Europe. As the future depends on input to the economy, and the circulation of capital, the digital era needs a new look at digital finance. For this reason, the top-down strategy, a Digital Finance Strategy, and the legislative proposals based on it are highlighted developments in the EU digital transformation. The hereby overview provides an insight into the preparatory legislative contribution in the field of digital finance and a more precise view of the EU’s efforts to frame the novel market of crypto-assets as well as to tame the risks deriving from the digital dependence, which is common to different participants of the financial market.

As the European Union has set determined digitalization policy targets, the European Commission’s digital strategy aims to empower people, businesses, and public administration with new generation of technology.

In view of the above agenda, this chapter examines Contract Lifecycle Management artificial intelligence solutions and software systems as a form of the aforesaid new generation of technology in the context of business contracts. Further, this chapter explores its potential role in the strategy implementation and progress of digitalization. Could enhanced utilization of Contract Lifecycle Management approach catalyst digitalization in the European Union?

While organizations in both private and public sectors are in different phases in their digital transformation journey, they are facing challenges to make it succeed. Where a resolution has been the replacement of “old-fashioned” human-centered systems with digitalization-focused solutions as they may be considered more objective, more scalable and more trustworthy, at the same time many humans are not only pleased about this development but also increasingly worried about the consequences this evolution may entail.

In addition to reviewing Contract Lifecycle Management as digital systems and artificial intelligence-based solutions controlling all contracts-related data during the entire contract lifecycle, it is viewed as the intra- and inter-organization function managing contracts, and supporting (human) contract parties to enhance their contractual relationships.

As the European Commission desires this decade to become Europe’s “Digital Decade,” this chapter concludes how Contract Lifecycle Management could help to achieve this goal for Europe. In addition, this chapter proposes several avenues for future research.

Tax rules determine who should contribute to society. Modern tax rules are designed a century ago when business took place in a physical world, and providing digital goods and services was unimaginable. Today, digital services are provided via the Internet, making it possible to be not physically present in the countries where the services are actually consumed. This has caused the most fundamental discrepancy between traditional tax rules and digital economy models, or so-called “a scale without a mass” businesses. This is, however, not the only issue the EU is facing today in regard to the digital economy and taxation.

This chapter highlights the current status of the EU tax rules applicable to the digital economy and provides some predictions as to what direction the rules will be developing. We first address what have been the recent trends in the EU tax law in general, giving some understanding on what is the overall tax climate and the most critical issues today. Followed by a brief detour to the characteristics of a digital economy that distorts traditional tax rules, we proceed to the trends in direct taxes, indirect taxes as well as tax information exchange. This chapter’s special focus is on the EU’s “global” minimum tax (i.e., the Pillar 2 Directive), as well as the digital permanent establishment proposal (i.e., the Pillar 1 Directive). Value-added tax treatment of electronically supplied services and electronic communications services is the focus in indirect taxes. As for tax information exchange, the proposed information exchange for crypto platforms is discussed in more detail.

Digitalization and automation are priorities in the European Union. The process has become central in the constant evolution of the organization internally, but also externally. The new digital economy will have a relevant impact on the trade relations between the main commercial areas of the planet. Therefore, the European Union needs to develop its own model and foster interconnection with other parts of the world in order to compete with powers like the United States of America or China. This chapter focuses on digital economic matters and its relevance for the European Union economy in the context of a world digital market.

Modern societies are increasingly dependent on technologies. Emerging technologies offer a variety of solutions in different aspects of our lives, lives of the modern societies, and it is hard to imagine ordinary functioning without these technological solutions. However, ethical aspects of such ever-increasing impact of modern technologies on our lives are often neglected, or at least not relevantly reflected upon. This research aims to engage in ethical discussion about modern technologies, focusing on the European Union, highlighting important aspects, and providing thorough analysis.

Personal data protection is getting more and more noticed in the twenty-first century. Personal data may be transferred quickly from one contact point to another in large amounts and free of charge within a fraction of a second. Personal data is called the new oil and those processing personal data are subject to many renewed rules to protect personal data.

The rapid development of information technology in recent decades has brought innumerable benefits, such as the spread of eHealth and the development of personalised medicine, but also concerns, such as phishing for data and the threat of identity theft.

The widespread adoption of the new technologies and the increased need for privacy have led to the creation of new regulatory proposals and frameworks in the European Union that ensure the protection of the rights of individuals and regulatory and judicial oversight.

One of these frameworks is the GDPR. The creation of new data protection regulation addresses the need for a comprehensive and contemporary legal regime that governs the processing of personal data at a time when such data has become a product marketed and sold in exchange for services or profits. In addition, there are a number of proposals and other new pieces of legislation in more specific areas that also contribute to the further development of the level of data protection. Some of these are selected and covered by this chapter.

Digital tools have increased efficiency and flexibility for employers and employees but have also created a constantly on-call culture, with employees being easily reachable anytime and anywhere, including outside working hours. Technology has made teleworking possible, while the COVID-19 pandemic and the lockdowns have made it widespread. On the one side the online and off-side working has sustained the employment rate even during the pandemic, but it has also blurred the distinction between work and private life. Between 2020 and 2021 during the lockdown in EU member states, 37% of workers had started working from home. According to Eurobarometer, 27% of people who work from home worked outside working hours. The European Parliament had called on the Commission to come up with a law containing the right to disconnect, as it is not part of the EU law, although the right to work and related free movement of workers is the essential part of the EU internal market. The EP Resolution adopted on 21 January 2021 defined the right to disconnect as “the right for workers to switch off their digital tools including means of communication for work purposes outside their working time without facing consequences for not replying to e-mails, phone calls or text messages”. It is defined as “a fundamental right which is an inseparable part of the new working patterns in the new digital era” and simultaneously also as “an important social policy instrument at Union level to ensure protection of the rights of all workers”.

This chapter reviews the digitization process of the courts in the five selected Nordic countries and the regulatory components that support the evolution of e-governance solutions in this field in the region. These states have maintained a paradigmatic democratic prosperity where the judicial activity and its procedural justice elements have been considered central to the proper implementation of the rule of law. The chapter is based on a case study that observes, from a historical perspective, the stages in the development of the Scandinavian legal culture giving shape to the specific features of a sub-family of law. More narrowly, it looks for e-justice benchmarking reform processes in five countries, using a comparative approach, and refers to some shortcomings that may be affecting the Nordic judicial cooperation. The chapter shows that both the reforms and shortcomings influence the extent to which the countries can advance in the direction marked by the European Union (EU) policies on cross-border cooperation in judicial matters.

In accordance with the principles of international law, each state has the exclusive authority to enact laws on its territory. However, digital transformation, in particular the dissemination of data, threatens the traditional foundations of sovereignty and jurisdiction. At the same time, in recent years, the EU has increasingly turned to the need to introduce the idea of digital sovereignty into its agenda. In this chapter, researchers analyse EU legislation, in particular GDPR (Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation) (Text with EEA relevance). Available at: https://​eur-lex.​europa.​eu/​legal-content/​EN/​TXT/​?​uri=​CELEX%3A32016R0679) and DSA, as well as EU law enforcement practice, in order to identify the legal mechanisms by which the EU is trying to realize its idea of digital sovereignty. Special attention is paid to the mechanisms of localization and extraterritoriality. The researchers conclude that EU data protection laws distinguish between the establishment of an extraterritorial effect and the localization of data.

The notion of “digital sovereignty” is at the core of contemporary geopolitical trends and regulatory initiatives aiming to shape the development of the digital realm in the EU’s regulatory and academic environments. In this light, developing policy and legislation that could enhance the strategic autonomy of the region and its citizens in the digital field has become imperative. The lack of a consensus on the features of the concept, the ambiguous interchangeable terms that refer to it and the contrasting scenarios where it is used suggest that a multidimensional approach to address its meaning is necessary. This research, based on a systematic revision of the literature on digital sovereignty, delineates a roadmap toward three differentiated but interconnected dimensions, and the streams of understanding that result from them. Hence, it examines the concept as a policy goal in the international realm, as the EU’s regulatory capacity and as an empowerment mechanism for the e-citizens. By exploring the interconnections between these dimensions, this article helps to conceptualize the cornerstones of an increasingly important notion.

The notion of digital sovereignty suggests a need for a reassessment of the traditional notion of sovereignty. However, even in the case of bold libertarian expectations of freedom of cyberspace at its very beginning, the actual practice witnessed rather the traditional legal regulation entering cyberspace. Hence, one could similarly boil digital sovereignty down to being “only” the traditional sovereignty exerted over digital elements and digital content. The major difference in comparison with the traditional “analogue” sovereignty might then lie only in the fact of a need for faster and more flexible grasping of new digital phenomena. This already happens nowadays—via newly designed agile legal tools applied by a cascade of intermediaries—mostly public administration bodies and private gatekeepers.

The world is facing a technological revolution where the internet is transforming our way of life in every dimension. The European Union (EU)—as the European Commission (EC) has identified its six priorities—aims to take the leading global role in several policy areas to “build a stronger Union in the world.” The spread of the internet revolutionizes several sectors and industries and affects innovation, competitiveness, efficiency, security, and—among others—sustainability. The continuous innovation and the ubiquitous digital single market (DSM) open new possibilities for the European Union to become “fit for the Digital Age.” The Tech revolution requires smart legislation which is able to foster innovation. Designing a good legal architecture is an opportunity for the European Union, on the one hand, to harmonize the 27 Member States (MSs) national digital markets into a single one and, on the other hand, to use its market power to influence digital laws all over the world. Extraterritoriality is a key feature of European Union law that is based on the European market power. Providing access to the world’s largest single market for third-state actors is an advantage for which multinational corporations tend to comply with European standards and apply them outside the EU as well. Therefore, designing the digital laws is a power for the European Union enabling to export continental solutions outside the borders of the European integration. Exporting standards via corporate compliance is a soft power for the European Union to influence third countries’ legal systems without signing international agreements with those countries to do so. This gives opportunities for the EU to become a world leader in digital legislation, but creates new challenges for it as well.

New forms of public transportation services are constantly introduced in the context of automated mobility. However, these services do not only raise comfort, foster safety, and reduce costs, they also present new legal challenges within regulatory landscape especially concerning the issue of remote driving from the point of requirements on a remote driver and processing of personal data.

The article starts with an explanation of the basic notions of automated mobility and the inclusion of automated means of transport for the public. Different levels of automation are explained. New transportation services are explored from the point of view of remote drivers. The Discussion contains several recommendations towards regulation of remoted driving.

New information and communication technologies can make a significant contribution to the achievement of good governance goals. This EU “e-governance” can make public management more efficient and more effective, and bring several benefits. This research outlines the main contributions of e-governance in Europe: improving government processes (e-administration); connecting citizens (e-citizens and e-services); and building external interactions (e-society). Case studies are used to show that e-governance is a current, not just future, reality for developing countries and the European Union. E-governance requires a concrete roadmap for its development and this chapter focuses on the main steps required to implement an effective e-governance within the European Union.

The European Union elections are a reproduction of the national elections, with different electoral systems and national parties dominating the debate. Internet voting provides tools to implement real EU elections in the whole territory of the Union avoiding internal differences. This chapter explores the digital possibilities offered by i-voting to respond to the challenges of the European Parliament, providing a cohesive and European approach to the European elections. Internet voting has the potential to create a cohesive system fostering the union of the citizens of the European Union.

The main goal of this chapter is to show the relevance of postmodern theory for the creation of a theoretical framework for digital European citizenship and the digital European public sphere. The European Commission initiated Europe’s digital transformation and moved Europe towards creating an “imagined digital political community.” The digital transformation requires a rethinking of current conceptions of European citizenship and the European public sphere and the construction of a new theoretical framework for the development of digital European citizenship and the digital European public sphere. European citizenship and identity are dynamic and polyphonic categories. The same can be argued about digital citizenship, which is also a postnational and multilayered form of citizenship. However, both European citizenship and digital citizenship contain different binary oppositions, such as: self/other, urban/rural, European/non-European, and so forth. Postmodernism offers a framework for the development of the digital European public sphere and the concept of digital European citizenship that will overcome binary oppositions and the digital divide. Postmodernism rethinks the basic concepts in the history of philosophy and questions the entire ontological and epistemological regime, which exists as the subtext of the legal system. Postmodernism does not only encompass critical, discursive practices directed towards rethinking existing binary hierarchies and authorities, but also a critical relationship between the very representatives of postmodernism who are differently positioned in these disputes, as postmodernism eludes any coherence and homogeneity.

The European institutions are determined to foster the “Digital Decade” of Europe, based on common digital sovereignty and common standards according to European values and cultural principles, rather than following those of international powers. The priorities of the European institutions focus on data, technology, and infrastructure. Therefore, the combination of effectiveness and social focus is a priority in the process of digitalization. The European Union is making a considerable effort to implement digital solutions, but the process needs the leadership of the EU institutions in order to bring benefits for citizens and companies, respecting the European way of life. Each of the institutions selected for this research, European Commission, European Council and Council of the EU, and European Parliament, answer to different theoretical traditions and stimuli that are analyzed in order to clarify their role in the digitalization process of the European Union.

At least since 2018, Artificial Intelligence (AI) has been in a state of real effervescence. At the end of 2022, it became popular thanks to an advanced AI called Chat GPT. The proliferation of countless AI tools, in commercial versions, applicable to various professional, public and private spheres, has fuelled the debate on its evolution, impact, use or regulation. It is an exponential, disruptive, cross-cutting technology that raises ethical, legal and political questions and challenges. This chapter attempts to provide a political reflection on the EU’s regulatory approach to AI. First, it outlines the general context in which the EU should address the regulatory treatment of AI. Second, it looks at the threats and risks generated by AI which, to a large extent, are conditioned by the adoption of a techno-optimistic or techno-pessimistic reading. Thirdly, it examines models of governance and public intervention in the area of AI. Finally, it reviews the response offered by European institutions to the challenges posed and the regulatory model adopted in the field of AI.