Európai Unió : hírek magyarul

Press briefing ahead of the Eurogroup meeting will take place on 30 April at 13.45

The European Union and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) adopted a joint statement following their 25th ministerial meeting.

The press briefing will take place on Wednesday 29 April 2026 at 15.00.

A Tanács egy évvel, vagyis 2027. április 30-ig meghosszabbította a mianmari/burmai helyzetre tekintettel hozott korlátozó intézkedéseket.

Weekly schedule of President António Costa, 27 April - 5 May 2026.

Az állam-, illetve kormányfők 2026. április 23–24-i nem hivatalos ülése után tartott sajtókonferencián António Costa elnök ismertette a megbeszélések főbb eredményeit.

António Costa, az Európai Tanács elnöke a ciprusi Nicosiában 2026. április 24-én tartott megbeszéléseket követően kiemelte, hogy az EU megbízható és kiszámítható partner a régió számára.

A Parlament, a Tanács és a Bizottság elnöke a mai napon aláírták az „Egy Európa, egy piac” ütemtervet.

António Costa, az Európai Tanács elnöke az állam-, illetve kormányfők 2026. április 23–24-i, a ciprusi Ajía Nápában tartott nem hivatalos ülésének kezdete előtt nyilatkozott a sajtónak.

Presidents Costa, von der Leyen and Zelenskyy issued a joint statement after their trilateral meeting in Agia Napa (Cyprus), before the informal meeting of the EU heads of state or government, on 23 April 2026.

A Tanács elfogadta az orosz gazdaság létfontosságú ágazatait – például az energiaágazatot, a pénzügyi szolgáltatásokat, a kereskedelmet és a kriptoeszköz-ágazatot – célzó gazdasági és egyedi korlátozó intézkedések 20. csomagját. A csomag tovább gyengíti majd a rezsim azon képességét, hogy folytassa az Ukrajna elleni agressziós háborúját.

Az EU 90 milliárd EUR összegű hitel nyújtásával bizonyítja, hogy rendíthetetlenül támogatja Ukrajnát. A hitel célja, hogy 2026-ban és 2027-ben segítse a sürgős költségvetési és védelmi szükségletek finanszírozását.

Payments for Environmental Services (PES) have gained widespread popularity as a conservation strategy, promoted as a ‘win-win’ solution benefitting nature, local communities and economic development simultaneously. This chapter challenges the ideal vision of PES by examining common issues in watershed programmes, particularly in Latin America. Despite their theoretical appeal, PES schemes face fundamental challenges that undermine their promised benefits. Complex ecological systems resist the simplified economic models underlying PES, making accurate measurement and valuation of ecosystem services problematic. Power asymmetries enable wealthy downstream users to impose restrictions on marginalised upstream communities, perpetuating historical inequality rather than alleviating poverty. PES can also produce unintended environmental consequences through leakage, counterproductive incentives and erosion of intrinsic conservation motivations. Rather than offering a panacea, PES usually functions as a politically charged mechanism, consolidating resource control among powerful actors while deflecting environmental responsibility onto vulnerable communities, thus raises serious questions about its fairness and effectiveness.

Payments for Environmental Services (PES) have gained widespread popularity as a conservation strategy, promoted as a ‘win-win’ solution benefitting nature, local communities and economic development simultaneously. This chapter challenges the ideal vision of PES by examining common issues in watershed programmes, particularly in Latin America. Despite their theoretical appeal, PES schemes face fundamental challenges that undermine their promised benefits. Complex ecological systems resist the simplified economic models underlying PES, making accurate measurement and valuation of ecosystem services problematic. Power asymmetries enable wealthy downstream users to impose restrictions on marginalised upstream communities, perpetuating historical inequality rather than alleviating poverty. PES can also produce unintended environmental consequences through leakage, counterproductive incentives and erosion of intrinsic conservation motivations. Rather than offering a panacea, PES usually functions as a politically charged mechanism, consolidating resource control among powerful actors while deflecting environmental responsibility onto vulnerable communities, thus raises serious questions about its fairness and effectiveness.

Payments for Environmental Services (PES) have gained widespread popularity as a conservation strategy, promoted as a ‘win-win’ solution benefitting nature, local communities and economic development simultaneously. This chapter challenges the ideal vision of PES by examining common issues in watershed programmes, particularly in Latin America. Despite their theoretical appeal, PES schemes face fundamental challenges that undermine their promised benefits. Complex ecological systems resist the simplified economic models underlying PES, making accurate measurement and valuation of ecosystem services problematic. Power asymmetries enable wealthy downstream users to impose restrictions on marginalised upstream communities, perpetuating historical inequality rather than alleviating poverty. PES can also produce unintended environmental consequences through leakage, counterproductive incentives and erosion of intrinsic conservation motivations. Rather than offering a panacea, PES usually functions as a politically charged mechanism, consolidating resource control among powerful actors while deflecting environmental responsibility onto vulnerable communities, thus raises serious questions about its fairness and effectiveness.