Paco,
I'm not sure you are correct in your assessment of the future of JAR-OPS 3; recent indications are that EASA will accept a modified (in the same way as EU OPS 1) JAR-OPS 3. The stated intent is to remain in compliance with ICAO Annex 6 Part III - it is that which drives the content of regulations.
There is an amendment of Annex 6 Part III in the system which is likely to include the introduction of Exposure (a la JAR-OPS 3) along with Risk Assessment. Expect also some simplification of SARPs - I would say it will be evolutionary rather than revolutionary.
With regard to single pilot CRM; most of what has been said here is correct, in North America Aeronautical Decision Making, in Australia Risk Assessment, in the past Airmanship and now CRM all have as their aim increased pilot awareness of his likely failings. I think that
tripletach has it about right:
A modern 'CRM' course is more about recognising the limitations and short comings of all humans (yes all, not just the ones with so called poor airmanship) and provides tactics to combat the errors and poor decisions that occur from being human.
Anyone that thinks they get all the training in this area that they need at flight school is kidding themselves.
Some of these training concepts can have huge improvements in operator safety. PHI introduced Aeronautical Decision Making training in 1986. By 1988 their company accident rate had reduced by 54%. Bell helicopters, US Navy, USAF, Transport Canada Civilian Cadets, all saw similar improvements when implementing this type of training.
Jim