The EU integration process of Albania began in 1992. The country’s political class vowed immediately after the fall of communism, that it would decidedly strive to integrate Albania as soon as possible into the Euro-Atlantic structures. This ambition was welcomed by the EU and soon after supported by it with political and financial means. However, the process is pending until today. This research’s goal was to examine whether the outcomes of the process were in fact compatible with the given official conditionality or not. The study was grounded on the assumption that in such a complex process, both the institutional guidelines – enshrined in the Copenhagen conditionality – as well as the different conditionality-incompatible interests of the participating stakeholders are likely to have played a role for the results of the process. Taking into consideration this main assumption and the aim of this study, process-tracing was chosen to elaborate the topic. The main moments of the process were identified and the actors with the highest possible influence determined. The most important finding of this research was that the EU integration process of Albania was broadly running in accordance with the Copenhagen conditionality. Solely for two of the main moments an exception from this rule was observed.
Half a decade after the Euro crisis, the European Union (EU) is in dire need of a growth strategy that is – all at once – economically viable, politically legitimate and seen as socially fair. Without a strategic focus on an inclusive labour market, helping to ease the employment transitions for working families, undergirded by a comprehensive safety net and strongly supported by human capital investments from early childhood on, Europe risks becoming entrapped in economic stagnation and political discord. This was the central message of the ‘Social Investment Package’ (SIP), launched by the European Commission in February 2013. The SIP is best read as a strategic vision for welfare state modernization for post-crisis Europe, based on forward-looking social policies to ‘prepare’ individuals and families to respond to the changing nature of social risks in the competitive knowledge economy. The SIP was published in the wake of a major overhaul in EU fiscal surveillance – the Six Pack, Two Pack, and the Fiscal Compact – enacted after the Euro zone sovereign debt crisis of 2010. The central question of this paper is whether and to what extent Europe’s new macro-economic governance regime is supportive of the social investment imperative? The short answer to this question is ‘no’. Reinforced fiscal austerity, underwritten by heterodox Outright Monetary Transactions and quantitative easing interventions by the European Central Bank (ECB) to counter deflation, continues to be based on the widespread belief that generous social provision inescapably ‘crowds out’ economic growth, private entrepreneurship, employment participation and labour productivity. The ‘long’ rejoinder to the central question in this contribution is more positive. With the publication of the non-binding SIP communication, the intellectual genie of the social investment policy paradigm is out of the bottle, with fairly strong evidence of ‘capacitating’ welfare provision enhancing dual-earner employment and skills levels, while mitigating the reproduction of inter-generational poverty. The current schizophrenic posture of the European Commission as the ‘social investment cheerleader’, on the one hand, and the ‘fiscal austerity headmaster’, on the other, informed by contradictory policy theories, is difficult to sustain. The Eurozone has entered a period of transition. Policy attention is shifting to accumulating evidence, brought forth most notably by recent OECD studies, that well-calibrated social investment policies ‘crowd in’ inclusive growth and social progress in tandem. At the same time, a fragile recovery, competitive divergences and the social imbalances of mass (youth) unemployment, rising poverty and a deepening intergenerational divide, are increasingly met with rising anti-EU populism. In conjunction, negative anti-EU political feedback and more positive social investment policy feedback may open up a vista, contingent on effective political mobilization and adequate EU support, for anchoring an assertive social investment commitment in future EMU economic governance.
The purpose of this work is to investigate, whether the legal conditions for reintroducing internal border controls within the safety clause have been restricted or extended through the Schengen-Reform by the end of 2013. This paper therefore not only examined the development of the safety clause, but also compared the reform demands of the involved players with the achieved end results by illustrating two case studies on the reintroduction of border controls. The result showed that on the one hand legal possibilities to reintroduce internal border controls have been extended by adding a new safety clause; but on the other hand have been restricted by procedural requirements – which in total may not be qualified as a spill-back in the European integration process.
This paper analyzes Austria’s contribution to the integration of the Western Balkans into the European Union (EU). I investigate this research interest by combining liberal intergovernmentalism with theories on how small states conduct foreign policy. The Austrian position to promote EU-accession for all Western Balkan states was established at the beginning of the 2000s, driven primarily by the desire to enhance its security, but also by economic interests. In the relevant EU negotiations, Austria not only used the threat of a veto but also relied on coalition building and side-payment and presented its position as norm-based. However, these strategies did not always lead to satisfactory results for Austria.
Draft version of the Chapter 12 of the forthcoming edited volume on the EU and its member states edited by Eleanor Zeff and Ellen Pirro and to be published by Lynne Rienner Publishers in the US.
Austria passed through recent crises relatively unscathed, although its banking sector remains vulnerable to shocks. Austria is the wealthiest EU country, with some of the highest living stand-ards and lowest unemployment.
As in many past crises, its unique system of a social partnership coordinating its economic and social policies served it well, despite increasing internal and exter-nal tensions that put it under pressure.
During the two decades of its EU membership, Austria was more exposed to external shocks as its economy in general and banking sector in particular became more open.
Austrian authorities managed to reduce the destabilizing effects of financial contagion and contributed to coordinated international responses to the financial crises. At the same time, the crisis experience undermined public support for European integration, as is indi-cated by the 20 per cent of votes for the populist right in the recent national and European elec-tions. Nonetheless, the government remains broadly pro-European and support for EU policies and reforms is above the EU and Euro area averages.
Gabriel N. Toggenburg
The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union is turning 5 years old. The EU’s human rights bill was adopted back in 2000 but entered into force only in December 2009. 5 years later it appears timely to take a look at the Charter and, starting from an analysis of its character, examine the effects it has had on the European Union over the years. The Charter’s character is here depicted as both conservative and innovative. It is argued that the Charter indeed made a difference in the EU landscape and influenced the way how EU institutions look at fundamental rights. Furthermore, the Charter also plays a role at national level which is exemplified through a look at its use by national courts.
The author depicts the Charter as an instrument of multilevel governance as the Charter can inspire the political process even outside areas where EU law as such applies. In that sense the Charter is not only a ’Charter of Rights’ but also a ‘Charter of values’. This makes the Charter a relevant instrument not only in the context of an eventual creation of an EU internal strategic framework for the protection and promotion of fundamental rights but also in the context of the rule of law mechanism.
Working paper based on the 2014 Vienna debate on European integration between Fritz Scharpf and Henrik Enderlein
The policies of the European Central Bank and a series of reforms have stabilized the Euro area. However, further systematic reforms are necessary for the long-term viability of the Euro. At the same time, the limited legitimacy of many crisis-induced measures and their asymmetric conse-quences in terms of growth and employment across the Euro area make unanimous agreement on systematic reforms difficult. This keeps the Euro area vulnerable to economic and political shocks that may yet force either its systematic reform or break-up.
The 2014 Vienna debate on the future of Euro has revealed some agreement on reforms that could make the heterogeneous Euro area viable over the long-term, as well as two fundamental disagreements on the political feasibility of such reforms and on the consequences of (openly discussing the) reintroduction of differentiated macroeconomic policies within the Euro area. Possibly, these disagreements could be reconciled when formulating a policy recommendation for moving ahead: the Euro area needs to focus on minimizing the reform agenda in order to maximize the political chances of its adoption while also exploring unorthodox strategies and break-up scenarios in such a way that would not trigger a self-fulfilling crisis. This would provide the Euro area with a realistically designed 'Plan A', but also a better idea of a 'Plan Z' that could guide its actions in case joint responses get overwhelmed by the next bout of crisis.
Henrik Scheller and Annegret Eppler
The still continuing effects of the financial and economic crisis 2008/2009 constitute a dilemma for political science research on European integration. Since an elaborated European disintegra-tion theory does not exist, it is hard to oppose the popular scenarios on a possible collapse of the EU with well-grounded scientific explanations. This Working Paper therefore wants to stake out the research field to outline the complexity of the problem. We argue that the discussion of Euro-pean disintegration phenomena extends our understanding of the whole integration process and its functional conditions.
For this purpose, the Working Paper first collates the most recent state of research. In a second step, we evaluate established integration as well as federalism theories with regard to their explanatory power of European disintegration. This is followed by our own defini-tion of disintegration, which allows us to capture the various dimensions of the phenomenon. In the penultimate section, we exemplify the requirement for a multidimensional understanding of European disintegration by a brief empirical analysis of the integration process since the outbreak of the financial and economic crisis in 2008/2009.
Gerda Falkner und Patrick Müller
Urgent challenges facing the European Union today, such as the risk of climate change or the stability of financial markets, are global in nature, exceeding the problem-solving capacity of nation states and even the EU. While the demand for global governance solutions is rising, the capacity of the EU to shape global policy outcomes in line with its domestic policy solutions faces important limitations. The EU has been able to exercise decisive influence in at least some policy areas, most importantly in writing the rules of the world trade regime in tandem with the US until the 1990s.
Yet the emergence of the BRIC countries along with other important changes at the international level increasingly circumscribes EU influence. Providing a synopsis of our research project, this working paper addresses key opportunities and constraints faced by the EU in a changing international system. It also makes recommendations for an effective European role in global governance. However, please be aware that only the full-length version can do justice to the complexities of the research project with its in-depth questions, methods and findings.
Development is not possible in conflict. This is often assumed in the academic literature and in the practice of development cooperation. The underlying assumption that development can only occur once peace has been established is often seen as a “sine qua non” condition.
The present work questions this assumption; it examines whether development in a conflict environment is possible and what elements are needed to achieve it. To this end, the peace laboratory in Colombia´s Magdalena Medio region was studied and the “Ciudadela Educativa” was analysed in more detail. This research is empirically based on an analysis of primary and secondary literature, as well as several interviews held in Colombia.
This paper takes the analysis of the perception of development in the theoretical discourse as a starting point. The author has found that the prevalent understanding of development in the literature does not necessarily coincide with the understanding of the concept by those involved in the peace laboratory. They tend to use a broader definition consisting of “waking up and taking action” which can be understood as a process of social change and transformation.
Based on the guiding idea that “we do not need to wait until the peace arrives to start developing our region” a school was built in the middle of a conflict territory. This “first development then peace”-approach contradicts previous practice of development cooperation, in which development can only take place once there is peace. A “grassroots-level” leadership familiar with the specific regional and local situation that included progressive elements was essential for the success of the project. It was the decision making authority and managed the project throughout all its phases. The “bottom-up”-approach, whereby development has to be wanted and supported by local actors, proved to be crucial especially in the initial phase.
Local actors do, however, depend on external assistance. The associated partners on the “top-level” (in this case the EU and the Colombian government) perform two important tasks: They guarantee the financing of the project and serve as a protective shield against the armed groups. Both guerilla and paramilitaries showed respect for the international presence.
An alliance with such powerful partners holds the risk of a dominant influence and the establishment of a “top-down”-approach: If the actors at the “top-level” pursue only their own agenda and interests and disempower the project management at the local level, then success and sustainability are at risk.
To summarise, it can be argued that in the case of “Ciudadela Educativa” two factors were crucial for successful development:
1. A clear and lasting commitment and coherence in the community;
2. The alliance with influential and powerful partners who serve as financiers and provide a protective shield against the parties in conflict, while keeping the project management and ownership solidly within the “grassroots-level”.
The aim of this thesis was to investigate which domestic influence structures official representa-tives of the Land Carinthia use to bring sub-national interests (with a European Dimension) into the Inner Austrian EU decision-making process. Due to the involvement of many different protagonists in the national EU decision-making process, first and foremost concern was to find out, whether the official representatives of Carinthia use influence structures of other national actors in addition to the explicitly guaranteed (formal legal) participation opportunities as part of the procedure of participation of Austrian Länder. In addition to the multi-level governance approach, theoretical base of this work is in particular the concept of sub-national influence. To be able to answer the research question, first the Inner Austrian EU decision-making process and the actors involved were illustrated on the basis of the existing primary and secondary liter-ature. Afterwards expert's interviews were held with members of the Carinthian government or their representing employees. The research showed that all official representatives of the Land Carinthia use many different influence structures in EU matters and therefore cooperate with a variety of domestic actors to bring or support sub-national interests in the Inner Austrian EU decision-making process.
The ongoing debate about the future of EU cohesion policy includes the voices of critics questioning its effectiveness, as well as those praising its contribution to regional development policy. The proponents specifically acclaim its enhancement of inter-institutional cooperation and coordination in the delivery of the regional development policy through the partnership principle. However, the legacy of centralism, lack of traditions in collaborative policy-making, and weakly institutionalized sub-national authorities in Central and Eastern Europe prompt questions about the transferability of the partnership approach to the new member states, the main recipients of cohesion funding. What is the impact of EU cohesion policy's partnership at the sub-national level? What are the mechanisms of the sub-national actors' adjustment to this EU-imposed practice and what is the scope for its institutionalization? By investigating sub-national partnership arrangements in Poland, the paper sheds light on these under-researched issues. It also offers a valuable contribution to the debates on the future of EU cohesion policy and the logic of the domestic policy actors' adjustment to externally imposed policy norms.
The paper draws on the concept of Europeanization, understood as the domestic impact of EU policies, to examine the implementation of a horizontal partnership in an unprecedented way by focusing on the strategies, preferences, and attitudes of the sub-national actors involved. It reveals that initially their adjustment to EU cohesion policy's partnership tends to be strategic and interest-driven. Nevertheless, there is also evidence that partnership can be internalized over time provided that it is in line with the actors' interests and there are specific incentives for cooperation. These findings show that strategic adjustment of domestic actors to European policy framework does not exclude socialization and internalization of the related norms and practices, as these processes can indeed be intertwined.
The EU's policy on Justice and Home Affairs has as its objective the establishment of the Union as 'an area of freedom, security and justice with respect for fundamental rights and the different legal systems and traditions of the Member States'. How does this essentially internal objective translate into international action? How does the Union respond, in an internal policy field, to external challenges?
This paper will assess the ambitions and the reality of the external dimension of the EU's policy of Justice and Home Affairs from two perspectives. The first is the close link between internal and external objectives and policies, and the implications for both EU competence and policy priorities. The second is the progressive constitutionalisation of the JHA field, its transformation from inter-governmental cooperation into a policy domain subject to the political and judicial accountability of ordinary legislative procedures.
The paper is structured around a case study of the negotiation, renegotiation and eventual conclusion of the EU-US Agreement on the transfer of financial messaging data for the purpose of combating terrorism (the 'SWIFT' Agreement), and in particular the interplay thereby revealed between
(i) different regulatory approaches to data protection in the context of international commercial transactions and the needs of private commercial undertakings;
(ii) different (EU) institutional actors in the context of international action against terrorism where the EU needs to be seen as an effective actor and partner of the US; and
(iii) the needs of public security and the need to provide against the risk of breaches of individual rights of data protection and privacy through the misuse of security-based powers.
The EU's founding fathers had the protection of the EU's constituent units as a key concern and set up serious hurdles to policy innovation in the absence of unanimous governmental agreement. These institutional design features, aptly characterised as "joint-decision trap" by Fritz W. Scharpf, were only softened but not erased over time. Nonetheless, the problem of how to innovate has, at times, been overcome through eclectic means. There are indeed some well known and quite visible practices as well as some less expected and more obscure strategies that have propelled the EU's policy system beyond what has for a long time been expected.
This paper argues that there are two strategic moves the European Commission (and, at times, other supranational actors such as the European Court of Justice) can use to actively overcome member state opposition: first, sidelining some or even all national governments; and, second, manipulating relevant policy preferences. These two basic strategies can be seen to interconnect the diverging basic assumptions of intergovernmentalism and neofunctionalism as 'passerelles'.
The European Union is gradually emerging as a global actor, a role which the Lisbon Treaty aims to enhance. Yet the global order is changing rapidly, from the uni-polarity of the post-Cold War years to some inchoate form of multi-polarity. In that emerging world, both the traditional and the rising powers face huge responsibilities in defining the contours of a consensual new order which will deal effectively with the inter-connected challenges of the 21st century: regional stability, arms control, environmental protection, energy security, climate change, poverty and inequality and migratory flows. Most of the global actors are centralized nation states with well-defined national strategies. The EU faces additional obstacles in generating a "grand strategy" which effectively articulates the relationship between means and large ends. Yet in many ways, the EU has already trail-blazed the type of world order which appears to be emerging, one in which international law and institutions are primary, in which the limited utility of military power is recognized, in which failing states are more destabilizing than powerful ones and in which human security is as important as state security. If the EU can begin to address these problems with strategic clarity, it can have an important role to play in the striking of the grand bargains necessary to underpin the new world order. If it fails to define a grand strategy, it will be increasingly marginalized from the global stage.
This paper focuses on new modes of governance in the EU’s attempts to impact upon states, which are not (yet) members and which have become members in the 1980s. More specifically, I seek to explore the role of new modes of governance for the implementation of EU policies and EU primary Law in different types of states, “weak states” in particular, including Southern European member states, CEE candidate countries and associated states in the former Soviet Union and Northern Africa. To what extent have new modes of governance helped weak states that lack sufficient capacities to adopt and implement domestic reforms to comply with EU norms and rule cope with the challenge of accession and approximation to the EU?
This paper is an accompanying text to the Compliance Database – the database of case studies of transposition, implementation, and compliance with EU law. ( http://www.eif.oeaw.ac.at/compliance/). The database contains the results from the literature survey in a form that enables detailed overviews of individual studies as well as easy comparisons across studies. The database has been developed with the support of the Institute for European Integration Research at the Austrian Academy of Sciences and it is a free and regularly updated resource. The conclusions of this paper are based as much on the inferences that the database offers, as on the original articles and books that have been reviewed.
This paper argues that the extent to which national administrations transpose EU directives in a timely fashion may be related to how transposition is coordinated inside national ministries. Focusing on transposition through secondary legislation in Estonia, Poland and Slovenia, the paper finds initial evidence that oversight can contribute to better transposition performance. Ministries with strong internal oversight tend to be better at timely transposition, while ministries with no or weak oversight perform worse. The results tend to hold if one controls for country effects, party preferences and transposition workload.
This paper analyzes the reasons for the failure of the multilateral resolution of EU cross-border banks such as Fortis. We argue that the pre-crisis regime based on soft law and voluntary coordination was unable to align the incentives of national authorities acting under the time pressure and uncertainty of a banking crisis. We ask whether this experience induced the Commission to propose reforms that would close the regulatory gap between integrated cross-border banks and national resolution regimes. Although, the Commission proposals submitted within a year of the crisis considered the more radical reform options, such as shifting the regime to the EU level or reorganizing cross-border banks so that they could be resolved on the national level, in the end the Commission supported the traditional reform path of deepening soft law and strengthening pre-crisis governance arrangements. At the same time, the new financing mechanisms introduced to stabilize the Eurozone can pave the way for the introduction of an EU-level bank resolution regime, when the next reform opportunity arises.
This paper seeks to analyse the evolution of the EU Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) as a Community tool for the management of a common-pool resource in the context of European integration. The theoretical framework, comprising different levels of analysis, employs European integration theories (Neo-Functionalism and Liberal Intergovernmentalism), paradigms of fisheries management (conservation, economic and social/community) and the concept of common goods.
Spillover contributed to the development of the two pillars of the original policy, the structural policy and the common market organisation, which was complemented by a resource conservation regime and a common external policy regarding fisheries. Also, the European Court of Justice has played a significant role in confirming the supremacy of Community law in this field. At the same time, domestic interests in several Member States led to the extenuation of Commission proposals and to perennial stalemates, also due to the Luxembourg Compromise and especially in negotiations on distributive matters. Furthermore, since the adoption of the first CFP in 1970, overdue reforms have not been undertaken (particularly the introduction of individual transferable quotas as a market-based management tool and a definitive end to subsidising overcapacity). Partial reforms, especially concerning equal access, enshrined the status quo through repeatedly renewing derogations, thereby making them de facto permanent.
The CFP has evidently failed to prevent the Tragedy of the Commons as most major fish stocks in Community waters are far below their 1983 levels, the year the common conservation regime went into effect. This trend has been exacerbated not only due to the CFP's ambiguous objectives that stem from its common heritage with the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) but also through a tendency of the policy to be oriented toward the social/community paradigm of fisheries management.
Going beyond the traditional “compliance” debate that is still ongoing in various journals and geared towards a specialized political science sub-community, this paper focuses on the wider social reform issues arising from the finding that there are serious compliance problems almost everywhere in the EU, particularly when enforcement and application of the standards are considered and not only formal transposition into domestic law.
This article presents in brief the findings from two large-scale research projects on (non-)compliance with EU law in two sub-fields of social policy, working time and equal treatment policies. Two teams of co-authors studied the "old" EU15 plus later four countries from Central and Eastern Europe: the Czech Republic, Hungary, Slovakia and Slovenia.
Four "worlds of compliance" were discussed on the basis of our findings from the 102 overall qualitative case studies. Searching for ways to improve the state of social affairs, it seems useful to build on these differential procedural modes of implementation and to draw up tailor-made recommendations of potential use for those fighting compliance problems, such as the European Commission.
Vivien A. Schmidt
The problems of identity and legitimacy in the EU are significant, but tangentially interconnected. The problems for EU identity derive not solely from the fact that European citizens have not developed much sense of being European because they have not been doing a lot in the EU; it is also that national elites have not been saying much about what the EU has been doing—except in moments of crisis. The problems for legitimacy derive not only from the ways in which the EU works—with more emphasis on ‘output’ for the people and ‘throughput’ with’ the people than ‘input’ by and of the people. It is also that the EU’s development challenges nationally constructed identities at the same time that it alters the traditional workings of national democracy. And this in turn adds to problems for citizen identification with the EU and their perceptions of its legitimacy. So the question is: would politicizing the EU help build more identity and legitimacy? Or would this only increase the problems?
Dieses Arbeitspapier stellt eine Diplomarbeit an der Universität Wien dar, die auf Anregung der Direktorin und mit Unterstützung des EIF entstand. Die Liberalisierung verschiedener Wirtschaftssektoren durch die EU ist in ihren Rückwirkungen auf Österreich noch bei weitem nicht ausreichend studiert, und Fragen der Implementierung von EU-Politiken stellen einen Schwerpunktbereich der Arbeit des EIF dar.
Wenngleich eine abschließende Beurteilung gerade des Spannungsfeldes zwischen De- und Re-Regulierung sowie zwischen Gemeinwohlzielen einerseits und Marktprinzipien andererseits fraglos aufbauender Studien bedarf, empfiehlt sich meines Erachtens die Zurverfügungstellung der vorliegenden Arbeit für die wissenschaftliche und politische Öffentlichkeit, was in dieser Form eines EIF - Working Papers gewährleistet werden soll.
(Direktorin des EIF)
Deliberative Demokratiemodelle nehmen in der theoretischen Diskussion um die Partizipation zivilgesellschaftlicher AkteurInnen einen bedeutenden Stellenwert ein. Dieser Artikel stellt die normative Annahme der deliberativen Polyarchie, Nichtregierungsorganisationen seien integraler Bestandteil neuer politischer Gestaltungsprozesse, ihren tatsächlichen Parti-zipationsmöglichkeiten gegenüber. Anhand der Einbindung von NROs in die Offene Metho-de der Koordinierung zur sozialen Eingliederung in Österreich wird analysiert, ob ihre Mit-arbeit die normativen Erwartungen der deliberativen Polyarchie erfüllt. Weiters legt der Artikel offen, dass das Verständnis politischer und administrativer EntscheidungsträgerIn-nen von jener Rolle, die NROs im Prozess einnehmen sollen, klassischen liberalen Demokra-tievorstellungen entspricht und damit einer deliberativen Einbindung von NROs im Wege steht.
Dieses Arbeitspapier fällt insofern etwas „aus der Reihe“, als es die erweitere Fassung eines Vortrags und kein typisches Forschungspapier darstellt. Diese Ausnahme scheint mir dadurch gerechtfertigt, daß der Autor niemand geringerer ist als der Doyen der Europaforschung in Österreich, Heinrich Schneider.
Seinen 80. Geburtstag im Sommer 2009 durften wir im Herbst mit einem kleinen „Kaminabend“ im Rahmen des Instituts für europäische Integrationsforschung an der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften mit feiern, und eine seiner jüngsten Arbeiten soll nun auf diesem Wege einer etwas breiteren Öffentlichkeit zugänglich gemacht werden. Die Leserschaft wird in diesem Beitrag einen breit gespannten Bogen von prinzipiellen wie auch kon-kreten historischen Anmerkungen sowie ein Panoptikum von wichtigen Einsichten und Erin-nerungen finden.
Dabei präsentiert das Papier Ausführungen zu folgenden Punkten:
a) der anfänglichen Verwendung und zum anfänglichen Verständnis von Integration;
b) dem deutschen Verständnis von Integrationsverantwortung;
c) den Karlsruher und Brünner Verfassungsgerichtsurteilen zum Lissabon-Vertrag;
d) der Dynamik und den Wirkkräften des Sinnwandels von Integrationskonzepten;
e) den Einigungsmotiven und politischen Weltbildern als Hintergrundfaktoren;
f) und dem Konzept des Superstaates.
This paper presents a literature review of all quantitative (statistical) studies of compliance with EU law. The paper introduces and makes use of a new online database which presents a detailed and comprehensive overview and classification of the existing quantitative research on transposition and implementation of EU directives in the member states. The study discusses and compares the different conceptualizations and operationalizations of compliance used, the list and specifications of the explanatory variables included in the models, the hypotheses proposed, and, most importantly, the findings of the literature. While the academic field has made progress in terms of assessing the scale and dimensions of the transposition failures in the EU, the causal inferences advanced in the existing literature are often weakly supported and sometimes contradictory when all studies are considered. The literature review suggests that only causal relationships that are specific for a certain time period, policy area, country, or type of legislation can be supported by empirical data, which means that broad generalizations about compliance in the EU might be impossible to uncover. The paper also suggests that decomposing the implementation process into its component stages, incorporating more rigorously the interactions between the Commission and the member states, and paying closer attention to the multilevel structure of the data in the statistical models can benefit future research on compliance in the EU.
Nicole Alecu de Flers
Recent years have witnessed a growing interest in applying the Europeanization concept to the study of foreign policy. Discussing how foreign policy Europeanization relates to Europeanization research in other areas of EU governance as well as to traditional approaches from the International Relations discipline, we examine the added value of studying foreign policy through the lens of Europeanization. As there is by now a considerable diversity of explanations for EU-induced changes of the national foreign policies of EU Member States, we propose important conceptual refinements, providing a clear distinction between the dimensions of Europeanization, their respective outcomes and particularly the mechanisms that drive Europeanization in these different dimensions. Overall, this working paper illustrates that Europeanization research addresses important shortcomings of International Relations approaches dominant in the field of European foreign policy analysis. By focusing on the interplay of “top-down“ and “bottom-up“ dynamics between the EU and national levels, which have been previously considered as isolated phenomena, the Europeanization concept contributes to a better understanding of the complex nature of European foreign policy-making.
This paper reviews the process of regulatory integration in the financial markets of the European Union. It shows that the regulatory framework for the single market in financial services has progressed in stages reflecting the evolution of EU policy-modes; from market opening to attempts at harmonization, to reliance on mutual recognition. The slow progress induced the EU to innovate its decision-making processes by introducing the Lamfalussy procedure in 2001. The new procedure accelerated the adoption of new regulations and is being adapted to ensure consistent enforcement across all EU jurisdictions. The next round of challenges to regulatory integration will stem from weak crisis management mechanisms revealed by the current crisis.
This paper summarizes the state-of-the-art on European social policy integration. It summarises the controversy over the ‘social dimension of European integration’, which has been ongoing ever since the founding fathers of European integration in 1957 agreed that the economies should be integrated basically without social regulation to counterbalance liberalisation effects. It presents the historical development of EU social policy as well as criteria for evaluating the state of “social Europe” and finally discusses how the EU is impacting on different types of welfare states. The argument is that the EU contributes to framework conditions that promote more ‘bounded varieties of welfare’ in Europe. In other words, it is held that there will be a more restricted variety, oscillating within limits that are directly or indirectly imposed or reinforced by European integration.
This contribution analyses recent CAP reform, the so-called Health Check, and evaluates the explanatory power of the theories usually applied to CAP change or the lack thereof. The paper starts out by giving a brief account over the founding ideas and instruments of CAP before it addresses recent reforms, the Fischler reform of 2003 and the so-called Health Check of 2008, in detail. Doing so, it is shown that member states resistance against a stronger marketisation of CAP persists while the discoursive trend towards rural development is not financially supported by member states. Three sets of theories commonly used in political science CAP analysis – ideas, interests and institutions – are identified and explored with regard to their explanatory power for the latest reform. The contribution concludes by arguing that there is no single factor driving CAP reform but that a triangle of international trade negotiations, national and sectoral preferences as well as dominating paradigms in public (and elite) discourses must be taken into consideration when seeking to explain the direction and the occurrence of CAP change.
This paper takes stock of academic literature and official sources on post-accession compliance in Bulgaria and Romania, the only new member states where the Commission has preserved the right to monitor key reforms beyond accession. The data used in the analysis suggests that the formal compliance with EU law has not decreased since their accession, quite the contrary. Bulgaria and Romania have performed well with regard to the transposition of EU law, yet signs of shortcomings appear at the enforcement level, most likely even on a greater scale than in other CEECs. Moreover, it is argued that in the first two years of membership the EU’s extended conditionality did not yield the same results in Bulgaria and Romania. While Romania managed to convince the Commission of its good will and determination to meet the benchmarks set by the EU, Bulgaria failed to do so and faced conditionality sanctions. The analysis concludes by presenting some directions for further research.
Gerda Falkner (ed.)
This paper presents a collaborative project by a team of members of the Institute for European Integration Research at the Austrian Academy of Sciences. It compares five EU policy areas in the following dimensions: common objectives on supranational level, EU competences in the field, available policy instruments, decision-making procedures and institutional developments, and finally the importance of the Lisbon Treaty's coming into force (or, alternatively, its failure). One insight from the comparative approach is that the Lisbon Treaty outshines previous EU reforms in terms of introducing new (explicit) objectives, improved policy instruments, new (explicit) competences and room for decisions without unanimity requirement. The final chapters offer a cross-sectoral discussion of reform potentials and their practical limitations, based on tables with meta-level overviews. The policies discussed in detail cover energy, social, foreign, security & defence as well as justice & home affairs.
Andreas J. Obermaier
Legal and political science scholars omit an important variable in explaining compliance with ECJ rulings: the fine-tuning in the follow-up cases. This paper shows with the Kohll/Decker social policy jurisprudence that, first, the Court applied the principles of free movement of services and goods to the Luxembourg health care system in the initial rulings in this series of cases and thereby challenged the institutional configuration of national welfare states. Step by step the ECJ extended the legal principles to other Member States and to similar cases. At the same time, however, the Court exercised self-restraint by narrowing the principles and by thus limiting the impact of its decisions largely to the less costly ambulatory sector. This fine-tuning of the jurisprudence influenced implementation processes and ultimately facilitated Member State compliance.
Vor kurzem wurde ein neuer Ansatz zur Stärkung demokratischen Regierens jenseits des Nationalstaats durch gerichtliche Rechtsdurchsetzung vorgestellt. Ihm zufolge ist die gerichtliche Durchsetzung internationalen Rechts durch private Akteure eine legitime Form demokratischer Partizipation, wodurch unter bestimmten Bedingungen demokratisches Regieren gestärkt wird. In diesem Beitrag teste ich diese Bedingungen im Kontext der Europäischen Union. Grundlage dafür sind vier Fallstudien über die gerichtliche Rechtsdurchsetzung der Natura 2000 Richtlinien in Deutschland, Frankreich und den Niederlanden. Ich zeige, dass die identifizierten Bedingungen nicht hinreichend sind, da zwei unabhängige Variablen – die Interpretation nationaler Gerichte und die Reaktion der zuständigen Behörden auf Klagen – nicht beachtet wurden.