History And Theory Of European Integration
History and Theory of EuropeanIntegrationMarina V. LarionovaJEAN MONNET European Module
Theorizing the new EuropeChanging Context of European Integrationthe old and new paradigms and theoretical synthesis Readings for the lectureRosamond Ben. (2000) Theories of European Integration. The European Union Series.Palgrave;Pierson P. The Path to European Integration: A Historical Institutional Analysis (1996).The European Union. Readings on the Theory and Practice of European Integration,Nelsen B.F. and Alexander C – G. Stubb (eds.), Palgrave, 1998;Marks G., Hooge L., Blank K. European Integration from the 1980s: State-Centric v.Multi-Level Governance (1996). The European Union. Readings on the Theory andPractice of European Integration, Nelsen B.F. and Alexander C – G. Stubb (eds.),Palgrave, 1998;Nugent N. Decision-Making in “Developments in the European Union”, edited by CramL., Dinan D. and Nugent N., Macmillan Press Ltd, 1999.JEAN MONNET European Module
The challenge of conceptualizing the EC as acomplex political system in the global worldorderPersisting challenge of definitionDonald Puchala (1972) “Of Blind Men, Elephants and InternationalIntegration”, Journal of Common Market Studies 10.“ different schools of researchers have exalted different parts of theintegration “elephant”. They have claimed either that their parts werein fact the whole beasts, or that their parts were the most importantones, the others being of marginal interest.”“No model describes the integration phenomenon with complete accuracybecause all models present images of what integration should be orcould be rather than here and now”.JEAN MONNET European Module
Competing or complementary approaches?a brief reminder of the basics Socio political and academic contexts Scientific progress Ontological and epistemological foundations Methodology Scope Purpose PerspectiveJEAN MONNET European Module
Functions of the Theory Explaining (why) and understanding (how):focus on reasons and causes Describing and analyzing:focus on the definitions and concepts / create thevocabulary Criticizing and developing norms and principles:focus on the normative assessmentsJEAN MONNET European Module
Area Polity: political community and its institutions,analyzing and explaining the communityinstitutional structure; trying to find constitutionalalternatives Policy: analyzing critically and reflecting onactual measures, policy styles Politics: processes of policy makingJEAN MONNET European Module
International RelationsversusComparative Politics ParadigmsFrom the Study of Integration to the Study ofGovernance? InstitutionalismMulti level governancePolicy networksActor based modelsJEAN MONNET European Module
Governance“continuous political process of setting explicit goals forsociety and intervening in it in order to achieve thesegoals”“setting goals and making decisions for an entire collectivity,including individuals and groups who have not explicitlyagreed to them. .involves a rather high level ofintervention which may stabilize or alter given status quo”Yachtenfuchs M. and Kohler-Koch B. (2004) Governance and Institutional Development inTheories of European Integration.“a pattern or structure that emerges in socio-politicalsystems as common outcome of the interactingintervention efforts of all involved actors.”Kooiman J. (ed.) Modern Governance: New Government Society Interactions.JEAN MONNET European Module
Governance functions“ havedrifted out of national control in theevolving EU system.”Ben Rosamond. Theories of European IntegrationJEAN MONNET European Module
Structure – Agency debateQuestions on the role of supranational institutions Why a group of principles would delegate powers tosupranational institutions? Under what conditions might powers be delegated to theagents? What conditions are definitive for the pattern ofdelegation? What if the agent behaves in a way divergent from thepreferences of the principles? Can control mechanisms be effectively employed?JEAN MONNET European Module
Institutions “provide contexts where actors can conduct a relativelyhigher proportion of positive sum bargains. offer information-rich venues where transparency prevailsand where trust is high. Act as intervening variables between actor preferences andpolicy outputs.” Act as a comprehensive institution in which the memberstates are embedded in a system of information andassessment, creating pressure for compliance or normsabiding behaviorJEAN MONNET European Module
InstitutionalismsMid level theories focused onthe effects of institutions as intervening variablesin politicsJEAN MONNET European Module
Broad Sociological Institutionalism:definition and approach Institutions include informal norms and conventions as wellas formal rules. Institutions are shapers of behavior and cognition. Institutions constitute actors by providing cognitive scripts andtemplates. Actors follow logic of appropriateness. Interests and identities are endogenous to the institutionalinteraction process. Discourse and communicative actions are employed aspowerful strategic tools for shaping and deploying ideas,beliefs, knowledge, norms.JEAN MONNET European Module
Rational choice / Transaction costs approach Institutions are defined as formal legal entities and sets ofdecision making rules imposing obligations on the selfinterested political actors Political institutions are designed deliberately andsystematically to minimize the transaction costs associatedwith making public policy. Institutions act as agents/ preference formation is exogenous toinstitutions. Institutions operate within the boundaries set by the memberstates but can exploit the differences between the memberstates’ preferences for supranational entrepreneurship. Institutions ensure equilibrium and stability.JEAN MONNET European Module
Historical Institutionlizm: focus on account ofmember states’ constraints“Why gaps emerge in member states’ control over the evolution of Europeaninstitutions and public policies, why these gaps are difficult to close, andhow these openings create room for actors other than member states toinfluence the process of European integration while constraining the roomfor maneuver of all political actors”.“Evolution of rules and policies along with social adaptations creates anincreasingly structured polity that restricts the options available to allpolitical actors.”Paul Pierson. The Path to European Integration: A Historical Institutional AnalysisJEAN MONNET European Module
Historical Institutionlizm: approach Institutions defined as formal rules, compliance proceduresand standard operating practices structuring relationshipsbetween actors. Analysis of the EU as an emergent multi tiered system ofgovernance where the member states power is not only pooled,but, increasingly constrained by the dense institutionalenvironment. Rejection of functionalist explanation for institutional design. Emphasis on the effects of institutions on politics over time.JEAN MONNET European Module
Historical Institutionlizm: Method Historical analysis of the processes unfolding overa long period of time Analysis of the evolution of processes embeddedin the institutionsJEAN MONNET European Module
Historical Institutionlizm: key assumptions “Actors carry out institutional and policy reforms thatfundamentally transform their own positions (or those of theirsuccessors) in ways that are unanticipated and/or undesired.” Institutional choices taken can persist, shaping and constrainingactors later in time. Institutions possess the capacity to mold the goals andpreferences of the principles and thus influence politicaloutcomes. Divergences between the institutional and policy preferences ofmember states and actual functioning of the institutions andpolicies can not be closed.JEAN MONNET European Module
Factors Causing the Gaps Restricted time horizons of the national actors Autonomous actions of the supranationalinstitutions Significant potential for unintended consequences Changes in the decision makers’ preferences overtimeJEAN MONNET European Module
Barriers to bridging the gaps Resistance of the EC institutions and theirexpanding authority Institutional obstacles to reform Sunk costs incurred in the previous actions Path dependence in which policy decisionsinherited from the past provide incentives toperpetuate in institutional and policy choicesJEAN MONNET European Module
Multi Level Governance perspective Seeking to avoid state centrism and sui generistreatment of the EU Treating the EU system as a polity with authoritydispersed between levels of governance Linking policy making and institution building Integrating competition for political power intoanalysis Allowing normative consideration on politicalorderJEAN MONNET European Module
Multi level governance model “decision-making competencies are shared by actors atdifferent levels” “collective decision-making among states involves a significantloss of control for individual member states’ executives” national “political arenas are interconnected rather thannested”; “states are an integral and powerful part of the EU, butthey no longer provide sole interface between supranational andsubnational arenas”Marks G., Hooge L., Blank K. European Integration from the 1980s:State-Centric v. Multi-Level Governance Boundaries between different levels of governance become lessand less clear cut.JEAN MONNET European Module
The European Union Policy – MakingWho Decides What in the EU? EC role in overcoming transaction costs andacting as a broker EC legislative initiative authority and consensusbuilding capacity EP legislative powers and advisory capacity Influence of the transnational interest groupsJEAN MONNET European Module
Policy InitiationCommission – setting the agenda Formal power to initiate and draft legislation EC and EP right to request the Commission to produce proposals Advisory / management / regulatory committees EC ratifying common opinions/ resolutions/ agreements/ recommendations Regional governments initiatives Private and public interest groups demands Process managerInterlocutorExpertise and competences / information bearer and managerProvider of infrastructure for information and knowledge exchangeHub for networksJEAN MONNET European Module
Decision – makingEuropean Council and the Council of Ministers – mainlegislative body QMV Right of Council President and Commission to call a voteAmendments to council’s Rules of procedure July 1987 Transformation of the “vital national interest” notion Unanimity decision – making principle perseveranceJEAN MONNET European Module
Levels of Implementation SupranationalNationalRegionalLocalJEAN MONNET European Module
AdjudicationECJ Serves the principles long term interests of EU lawenforcement. A means to solving problems of incomplete contracting. Monitoring compliance with the EU obligations.“The Council, Commission and Parliament interact within alegal order which has been transformed into asupranational one through the innovative jurisprudence ofthe European Court of Justice.”Marks G., Hooge L., Blank K. European Integration from the 1980s:State-Centric v. Multi-Level GovernanceJEAN MONNET European Module
ECJCommissionNational courtsNational authorities“Directly binding legal authority and supremacy are attributes ofsovereignty, and their application by the ECJ indicates that theEU is becoming a constitutional regime”Marks G., Hooge L., Blank K European Integration from the 1980s:State-Centric v. Multi-Level GovernanceJEAN MONNET European Module
Legislative proceduresConsultation EP puts forward an opinion Council acts as the sole final decision makerJEAN MONNET European Module
Co-decisionExtensive inter-institutional formal and informalliaising and bargainingEC and EP agree on a text of amendmentsOne reading provision– ESC and CoR are consulted– Council unanimous support to amendments Commission doesnot agree withJEAN MONNET European Module
EC and EP do not agree at first readingSecond reading provision Council adopts a common opinion by QMV Council provides its position explanation to the EP Commission provides its position explanation to the EP EP right to approve/ take no action EC adopts the common position as a legislative act in case of EP approval orinaction EP right to amend/reject by the absolute majority of the MEPs EC refers the proposal to a conciliation committee comprised of equalnumber of EC and EP representatives ) a conciliation committee agrees on a joint text– proposal is approved by QMV of the EC and majority voting in the EP-) a conciliation committee can not agree on a joint text– proposal is droppedJEAN MONNET European Module
AssentEP absolute majority assent to– membership agreements– International agreementsJEAN MONNET European Module
Decision-making authority shared byIntergovernmental and Supranational institutions“with the member states retaining a very substantial rolein decision making, including the exclusive power toextend or reduce EU policy making competencies.”JEAN MONNET European Module
John Peterson’s approach based onsudivision into levels of analysisLevelDecisive variableBest modelSuper-systemicHistory makingdecisionsChange in the widerpolitical /economicenvironmentMacro temicPolicy settingInstitutional changeInstitutionlismMeso levelPolicy shapingResource dependenciesPolicy network analysisPeterson J. “Decision making in the European Union: Towards a framework foranalysis”, Journal of European Public Policy 2(1)JEAN MONNET European Module
Jeremy Richardson’s approachA toolkit for analyzing development of a piece of legislation or emergence of EUpolicy competence?Stage of the policy processTheoretical toolsAgdenda settingEpistemic communitiesPolicy formationPolicy communities / networksPolicy decisionsInstitutional analysisPolicy implementationInterorganizational / behaviouralanalysisRichardson. J. (1996) “Policy making in the EU: Interests, Ideas and GarbageCans of Primeval Soup” in J. Richardson (ed.), “European Union: Power andPolicy Making” (London: Routleadge).JEAN MONNET European Module
Policy network analysis – actor based approachPolicy networks“a cluster of actors, each of which has an interest or “stake” in agiven policy sector and the capacity to help determine policysuccess or failure”Peterson J. in Policy Networks and European Union Policy Making Serve as venues for pooling and exchanging information /exerting influence Facilitate reconciliation, mediation, compromise Facilitate policy making by reinforcing / creating normsJEAN MONNET European Module
Policy network analysis: main propositions Policy networks structures affect policy outcomes inthe discreet EU policy sectors. Federal and quasi federal polities give rise togovernance by policy networks. Governance by policy networks may result inlegitimacy deficit.JEAN MONNET European Module
Policy network analysis: level of analysis and scope ofapplicationMeso (sub systemic) level of decision making– Cohesion policy– Research policy– CAP“A repertoire of adaptable network systems at the EU levelrather than a single pattern”Peterson J. in Policy NetworksJEAN MONNET European Module
EU policy networksRelatively stable –if insular & resources independent Highly discrete and disconnected – sectors/policiesExpertise / knowledge based - “epistemic communities”Policy goals based – advocacy coalitionsTechnocratic - Comitology systemMore horizontal than vertical in structureBrussels based and linked to national networksJEAN MONNET European Module
Critique Policy network does not constitute a model or atheory Policy making in EU is fluid, uncertain, diverseand too overpopulated to constitute stablenetworks Policy network analysis lacks the theory of power Policy network debate is vague and faces thechallenge of empirical verificationJEAN MONNET European Module
Agenda for development Describe, explain predict the outcomes stemming fromthe use of new EU policy methods Generate clear hypotheses on networks success factors Develop normative propositions on EU networksstructures and managementJEAN MONNET European Module
Thank you!JEAN MONNET European Module
Theorizing the new Europe“Why do states invest into an enterprise that resultsin a de facto clipping of policy autonomy?”Contents:New (liberal) intergovernmentalism.Two level games, influence of domesticpoliciesJEAN MONNET European Module
Readings for the lecture Rosamond Ben. (2000) Theories of European Integration. The EuropeanUnion Series. Palgrave; Moravcsik A. Negotiating the Single European Act: National Interest andConventional Statecraft in the European Community (1991). The EuropeanUnion. Readings on the Theory and Practice of European Integration, NelsenB.F. and Alexander C – G. Stubb (eds.), Palgrave, 1998; Hix S. The Study of the European Community: The Challenge toComparative Politics (1994). The European Union. Readings on the Theoryand Practice of European Integration, Nelsen B.F. and Alexander C – G.Stubb (eds.), Palgrave, 1998; Schimmelfennig F. Liberal Intergovernmentalism (2004) in EuropeanIntegration Theory. Wiener A. and Diez Th. (eds). Oxford; Dinan Desmond, “Treaty Change in the European Union: The AmsterdamExperience”, in “Developments in the European Union”, edited by Cram L.,Dinan D. and Nugent N., Macmillan Press Ltd, 1999.JEAN MONNET European Module
Overview of liberal intergovernmentalismby Frank SchimmelfennigLevel hIR rationalist institutionalism: state actors ininternational anarchy, rational choice ofinternational institutionsMediumLiberal theory Bargainingof Functional theoryof institutionalchoiceIntergovern ceJEAN MONNET European Module
Hard core neo realist paradigm States are the primary actors European integration - intensification of interstate cooperationin the face of a common threat Integration outcomes reflect the balance of power of themember states Imbalances in the gain from cooperation result in suspicion andconflict European Community - “ a mechanism for interstatecooperation that fulfilled the survival imperatives of a groupof western states in the context of emerging bipolar order”Ben Rosamond .Theories of European Integration European integration will loose momentum in a multipolarcontextJEAN MONNET European Module
Liberal state centered paradigm Continued emphasis on the centrality of the states Centrality of the relative bargaining power to theintergovernmental negotiations outcomes Understanding of domestic politics as a precondition to theanalysis of strategic interaction among states Exploration of the interaction between the domestic andinternational Emphasis on strategic rationality of states Integration of institutions as facilitators of positive sumbargaining into the analysisJEAN MONNET European Module
Liberal intergovernmentalism: assumptions1.2.3.4.5.States are the major actors (“unitary actors”)Foreign policy goals shift in response to changing pressures fromdomestic interest groupsState preferences are neither fixed nor uniformGovernments relative bargaining power is the result of asymmetricdistribution of information and benefits of a specific agreementInternational institutions are designed and established to overcomefirst order (achieving coordination) and second order problems (controlover observing rules for distribution of gains): Institutions design reflect the functions and specific problems of thecooperation; Institutions reduce the costs for achieving the outcomes andcon
Rosamond Ben. (2000) Theories of European Integration. The European Union Series. Palgrave; Pierson P. The Path to European Integration: A Historical Institutional Analysis (1996). The European Union. Readings on the Theory and Practice of European Integration, Nelsen B.F. and Alexander C – G. Stubb (eds.), Palgrave, 1998; Marks G., Hooge L., Blank K. European Integration from .
- common aspects of European cultures, heritage and history as well as European integration and current European themes European artists and transnational cooperation with operators from different countries, including other ECOCs. A strategy to attract the interest of a broad European public. Culture European dimension
Bible Translation Theory: History This thesis begins with an essential history of Bible translation theory, and it is important to highlight this discussion as (1) an essential history (it is selective not exhaustive) and (2) a history of translation theory (rather than practice). Any survey of the history of translation is
Humanist Learning Theory 2 Introduction In this paper, I will present the Humanist Learning Theory. I’ll discuss the key principles of this theory, what attracted me to this theory, the roles of the learners and the instructor, and I’ll finish with three examples of how this learning theory could be applied in the learning environment.File Size: 611KBPage Count: 9Explore furtherApplication of Humanism Theory in the Teaching Approachcscanada.net/index.php/hess/article/view (PDF) The Humanistic Perspective in Psychologywww.researchgate.netWhat is the Humanistic Theory in Education? (2021)helpfulprofessor.comRecommended to you b
Evolution is a THEORY A theory is a well-supported, testable explanation of phenomena that have occurred in the natural world, like the theory of gravitational attraction, cell theory, or atomic theory. Keys to Darwin’s Theory Genetic variation is found naturally in all populations. Keys to Darwin’s Theory
Brief History (Impredicative) Type Theory. 1971 Per Martin-Löf,A theory of Types. (Predicative) Type Theory as Constructive Set Theory. 1979 Per Martin-Löf,Constructive Mathematics and Computer Programming . 1984 Per Martin-Löf,Intuitionistic Type Theory. (Predi
the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union — in particular its Horizontal Working Party on Drugs — and the European Commission; the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC), the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and Europol; the Pompidou Group of the Council of Europe, the United Nations Office on Drugs and
SURVEILLANCE REPORT Annual Threat Report 2009 v ARI Acute respiratory infection E. Escherichia ECDC European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control EEA European Economic Area EFTA European Free Trade Association EMA European Medicines Agency EMCDDA European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addictio
learning teams, guided inquiry activities, critical and analytical thinking, problem solving, reporting, metacognition, and individual responsibility. Strategies for the successful use of learning teams are discussed, the roles of the instructor in this learning environment are described, and implementation hints
