THEORY
Theories of European Integration
European Integration and the First Attempts to Theorize It
The Intellectual Background: both functionalism and federalism addressed the problem of how to overcome war between nations. Functionalism and federalism is on how the idea of European integration emerged
International Relations Theories of European Integration
European political integration: def. by Haas- as a process whereby political actors in several distinct national settings are persuaded to shift their loyalties, expectations and political activities toward a new center, whose institutions possesses or demand jurisdiction over the pre-existing national states. The end result of a process of political integration is a new political community, superimposed over the pre-existing. def. by Lindberg: is the process whereby nations forgo the desire and ability to conduct foreign and key domestic policies independently of each other, seeking to instead to make joint decisions or to delegate the decision-making process to new central organs; and the process whereby political actors in several distinct national settings are persuaded to shift their expectations and political activities to a new center
Mitrany and Functionalism
Prevent war between states by taking the routine functional tasks out of the hands of national governments and giving them over to international agencies. World government would limit freedoms, and regional federations would reproduce on a larger scale the conditions that produced wars between states. The aim was to achieve peace.
Spinelli and Federalism
Monnet and Functional-Federalism
Neofunctionalism
Intergovernmentalism
Liberal intergovernmentalism
Supranational Goverance
European federalism attracted strong support among Resistance groups in war-time Europe.
Spinelli advocated a 'constitutional break' at the end of the war to supersede the system of sovereign states with a federal constitution for Europe
The Schuman Plan, argued for a European- wide economy
European integrations is a process that, once started, would undermine the sovereignty of states beyond the expectations of governments.
Agues that states are not unified actors, but that national interests are determined through a pluralistic process in which governments interact with organised interests. Organised interests were also seen to be important trasnational actors
Spillover: functional spillover, political spillover, and cultivated spillover would lead to the process of European integration to run out of control of national governments.
Hoffman. Argued that neofunctionalists had made three mistakes: 1. regional integration was not a self-contained process, but was influenced by a wider international context
- Governments were uniquely powerful actors because they possessed formal soverignty and democratic legitimacy
- Integration in low- politics sectors would not necessarily spill over into high-politics sectors
Moravcsik. Incorporated the neofunctionalist insight that national interests are defined as part of domestic pluralist political process; within this domestic process, economic interests were seen to be dominant
M proposed a two-level analysis/two level game of EU bargaining, in which governments' preferences were determined at the domestic level and were then used as the basis for intergovernmental negotiations at the European level. He denied the importance of supranational actors as independent actors in EU decision making and insisted that governments remained in control of the process of European integration.
was located in neofunctionalism, but also drew on transactionalism and new institutionalism.
Stone and Sandholtz argued the the EU should be studied not as one international regime, but as a series of regimes for different policy sectors, and that increased transactions across national boundaries would create a supranational society that favoured the creation of supranational rules to govern its behaviour.
creation of multiple agencies at regional and international level to regulate technical aspects of life.
Mitrany did not believe in the creation of a single supranational government
Creating functional agencies was a way of combating nationalism because it both shifted power away from the state in small areas and created interdependencies among states.
solution: create a single federal state in Europe united by a federal constitution. This would shift political power to single European government
it refers to a situation in which a given actor, related to a specific goal, creates a situation in which the original goal can be assured only by taking further actions, when in turn create a further condition and a need for more action
international activities of state where the outcome of a political process in which government's decisions were influential by pressures from various interest groups
Expects nationally based interest groups to make contact with similar groups in other countries (transnationalism), and departments of states to forge links with their counters parts in other states (transgovernmentalism)
Functional: argued that modern industrial economies were made up for interconnected pats, which you cant isolate from each other. Refers to integration resulting from interconnectedness of economies, with the result that integration in one area can lead for integration in a closely related areas
Political: refers to the gradual transfer of loyalties toward the European level among political elites, and interest groups who operate at European level. This increases their support for integration leading to pressure on integration
Cultivated: refers to the Commission's role in fostering European level interest groups and political elites
According to Hoffman, governments had much more anatomy, and therefore the integration process remained essentially intergovernmental
The competing economic interests are more important than partisan interest or secuirty concenr when it comes to defining the national interests.
The primary determinant of the preferences of a gov. was the balance between economic interests iwhtin the domestic arena.
national gov. believe that supranational organisations can best enforce and implement the policy decisions negotiated by national governments
Three key elements:
I. the development of transnational society
II. The role of supranational organisations
III. A focus on European rule-making to resolve what they called 'international policy externalities'
There is arise of these transaction that cross national border. National business actors favour supranational regulation of their industries because it allows them to operate in more markets under a single set of rules. To achieve this, they form alliances with the Commission to push for creation of rules at European level in certain policy sectors
PostFunctionalist theories: Hooghe and Marks have criticised other European integration for overemphasising the functional pressures associated with economic interests. They argue that identity issues are a crucial consideration in the process of European integration. They criticise other theorists for economic interests
Theories of EU Governance
A Shift of Focus: treat EU as a political system that is already in existence
New Institutionalism: Broadens the definition of institution to include informal forms such as culture or norms. Institutions is not neutral but can shape both outcomes and preferences. argues that analysts have lost sight of the importance of institutions in structuring political action
Governance and Networks: def. of governance commonly emphasise the proliferation of non-state actors in the policy process.
Rational Choice Institutionalism: emphasises the argument that the behaviour of political actors is shaped by the specific framework of rules within they operate. Focuses on the costs, opportunities and constraints that institutions create for actors.
Historical Institutionalism: emphasises the argument that political relationships have to be viewed over time and that decisions are shaped by the nature o pre-existing institutional relationships. broader def. on institutions by incorporating informal constraints on behaviour such as values and behavioural norms.
Sociological Institutionalism : emphasises the argument that the behaviour of political actors is shaped by informal norms and values. Emphasises how actors continually construct institutions in pursuit of legitimacy and approporiate institutions.
Policy Networks and Epistemic Communities: Richardson advocated the application of two concepts from the study of domestic politics: policy networks and epistemic communities
Policy Networks and the Study of the EU: A policy network is a set of resource-dependent organizations. The approach advocated analysis of sectoral policy networks that range from tightly knit policy communities to loosely bound issue networks
Network Governance
Epistemic Communities: are knowledge based groups that are most likely to be influential when policy markets face uncertainty over policy choices. This approach is complementary to the policy-networks approach
Agenda- setting: asks where issues on the political agenda come from and under what conditions these issues get into the agenda, while 'venue shopping' focuses on how the Eu had created opportunities for actors to exploit different policy venues.
Multi-level Governance: argued that individual governments were not in control of the process. Actors at supranational and sub-national levels played a key role also
transnational and transgovernmental alliances mean that states are open to external influences. The Commission is able to exploit this situation to promote its own agenda
It relies on the assumptions that actors (MS gov, voters, MEP) will act rationally in response ot this structure of costs and beliefs and seek to maximise their utility while minimising costs.
Path dependency: refers to the tendency for institutional design to become locked in over time. It also highlights that sometimes the development of institutions overtime can lead to unintended consequences.
The 'interests' vs 'ideas' dictotomy can also be described as rationalist vs reflectionist dichotomy.
- rationalist theories assume that interests are important for explaining policy outcomes. Tehy assume that actors have a set of interests and that they act rationally to pursue them. Rational institutionalist and policy network theories belong to this category
- Reflectionist theories assume that ideas can be as important as interests. Tehy say that interests are not fixed but are shaped and formed by our interactions. Sociological institutionalism and epistemic communities approach fits this category
Rhodos model: a policy network is a set of resource dependent organisations, meaning that each of the groups that makes up the policy networks needs something that the other have to fulfils own objectives.
- they note that MS gov. have reduced influence over outcomes because decisons are made colectively within the EU
- They emphasise that power is diffused within the state across administrative department or territorial levels and not concentrated in the national government.
- They also argue that supranational institutions are not controlled as easily as intergovernmental theories would suggest
the nature of the networks involved in policy making- how rightly or loosely structured they are- can effect the extent to which external actors and external pressures affect policy outcomes. The policy network approach is useful for understanding policy-making at its early stages of formulating policy opinions what Petterson calls the 'Sub-systematic' change.
Much of this work on the EU draw on Kingdon's classic study in which he identified three separate processes or 'streams'-of problems, policies, and politics- that develop largely in isolation from each other, but which must ultimately come together for significant policy change to occur
- Problems can rise up the political agenda through a high profile event or crisis(i.e. economic recession), or through a shift in respected indicators(on climate change)
- Policies generally emerge away from the political spotlight through the exchanges of 'experts', such as academics, staticians, and cicil servants. Ideas in this stream may float around for years before finding their moment-often after a softening up of policy makers has taken place
- Political processes, such as elections, leadership changes, and shifts in public opinion, also shape the agenda
Theorising Consequences
Critical Perspectives
Europeanisation
Meanings of Europeanisation
The Development of the Field: Laudrech, Closeness of fit. Radelli.
Uploading, Downloading and Cross Loading: Europeanisation increasingly understood as a two-way relationship between the Eu and its MS, involving both uploading of ideas and practices from MS to the EU level, and the downloading of ideas an dpractices from the EU level to MS. Crossloading refers to the trhe transfer of ideas or practices from one state to another: a process in which the EU may or may not play a role
Europeanisation and the Nee Institutionalisms: First generation and second generation
Europeanisation Assessed
Democracy
Democracy and Legitmacy
the Democratic Deficit: concerned with the degree to which the EU adequately represents and is accountable to European citizens
Vectors of Legitimation
Ways forward
Critical of What: rational and Postivist approaches
Social Constructivism
Critical Political Economy
Critical Social Theory
Critical Feminism
Post-Structuralism
Legitimacy three sources by Beetham and Lord: Performance(output legitimacy), Identity, Democracy
Scharpf is associated with the distinction between input and put legitimacy. input legitimacy: voting, interest rep.representation and participation
Lisbon Treaty
indirect legitimacy: the legitimacy that the Union derives from national governments