chapter 2 Flashcards
international relations (IR)
seeks to understand how sovereign states interact with each other and what forms of conflict and collaboration may be the result of this.
Neo-functionalism
Integration theory which states that member states will work together to reap
economic benefits, setting in motion a process in which ever more tasks are delegated to the supranational level.
Haas’ steps of integration
- Recognizing the possibility of mutual economic gains, governments decide to start cooperation in a specific policy area. They set up a supranational body which is responsible for administering and implementing their arrangement.
- . After the arrangement has been put in place, all parties realize that further economic gains can only be arrived at if adjacent sectors are integrated as well, spurring additional integrative steps. The result is what Haas calls a spillover of integration into other fields
- The creation of a new centre of authority fosters the emergence of new transnational interests that put additional pressure on governments to move towards further integration. This process is advanced by the new supranational institutions – such as the Commission – as well, who are eager to take up new responsibilities in order to advance their status as policymakers.
- The increased complexity of several functional arrangements will lead to a further institutionalization at the supranational level in order to coordinate policy-making. The result is a peculiar form of policy-making somewhere in between that of a purely intergovernmental organization and a fully-fledged federal state.
Spillover (and the types)
‘the way in which the creation and deepening of integration in one economic
sector creates pressures for further economic integration within and beyond that sector and greater authoritative capacity at the European level’.
- Functional; andere terreinen betrekken om het doel te behalen, zoals hiervoor benoemd voorbeeld. Haas maakt ook duidelijk dat het ontstaan van de EEC en Euratom dit concept bevestigen. Een gemeenschap enkel gericht op kolen en staal is niet mogelijk, de benodigde integratie werkt door
naar andere gebieden. - Political; politieke druk vanuit diverse nationale en private belangen om bv een grotere markt tot stand te brengen (pro-integratie). Belangenorganisaties van multinationals hebben door te lobbyen er mede voor gezorgd dat kleine Oost-Europese landen zijn toegelaten en de totstandbrenging van een gemeenschappelijke markt en daartoe het aannemen van de Single European Act (SEA).
- Cultivated; Actieve rol voor supranationale instituties. Via formele kanalen kunnen deze instituties druk uit oefenen, denk bijvoorbeeld aan de mogelijkheid voor rechters. Maar ook via informele kanalen zijn is er veel ruimte: “The Commission, for example, can act as a policy entrepreneur and in this capacity successfully rally support for further integrative steps. The Commission garnered support
for the SEA by convincing industrial corporations in the member states to press their governments for a further liberalization of the energy market.”.
supranational governance
Zij maken een onderscheid in beleidsterreinen en in welke mate zij zich lenen voor integratie: –> Integrative moves are more likely in those sectors where there is a considerable amount of trade between member states
Lidstaten kunnen de gevolgen van integratie slechts
tot op bepaalde hoogte voorspellen en overzien. “Once a policy area has been integrated, moves by supranational actors such as court rulings by the Court of Justice may give the integration process a dynamic of its own that generates further steps which can no longer be contained by the member states.”
Intergovernmentalism
Integration theory which holds that member states are fully in charge of
cooperative steps they take and only collaborate with a view to their direct selfinterest.
liberal Intergovernmentalism
Moravcsik’s close reading of the positions generates the following conclusions:
- The preferences of member states are not formed autonomously but are the
result of the influence of different domestic interests on their respective
governments. - Economic considerations are always a major consideration, while geopolitical
considerations only play a role in half of the cases examined. - The outcomes of negotiations are the result of bargaining between the member
states, with those standing to win the most willing to grant concessions to those
not perceiving the deal to be in their interest. The role of policy entrepreneurs
such as the Commission has been minimal, but not completely absent. - The institutional arrangements to put these deals into effect should be seen as
means to ensure the credible commitment of each of the member states
–> Compared to Hoffmann, Moravcsik pays more attention to the role of domestic,
economic influences on the position of national governments in international
negotiations and organizations.
Over welke 3 zaken zijn intergovernmentalists en supranationalists het eens
Member state preferences and activities are not fully autonomous, but partly the
result of domestic circumstances, most importantly the activities of interest
groups that try to lobby their governments. Hence, a better understanding of
member state positions in negotiations requires knowledge of the domestic
forces that shaped those positions.
The roles and influence of actors depend upon the type of decisions and the
policy area studied. What may be true in some policy areas does not have to
hold in other ones.
Supranational institutions amount to more than being the mere administrators of
the deals struck between member states. Studying the actual behavior of these
different institutions is necessary to better grasp the processes of integration.
Eu politics
approach the EU as a political system in its own right and examine its functioning
Three types of institutionalism
Rational choice institutionalism –> assumes that actors try to maximize their selfinterest. Institutions are important because they define the ‘rules of the game’. In
that way, they determine how decisions are made and what strategies actors can
and cannot use. Institutions are therefore important as constraints on the
behavior of actors. Rational choice institutionalism defines institutions in a narrow
sense as formal rules, such as laws and procedures.
According to sociological institutionalism, –> institutions do not merely define the
rules of the game but shape the way actors perceive the world as well as their
own preferences and identities. As a result, actors do not merely attempt to
maximize their self-interest but are searching for the outcome that is most
legitimate in terms of the institutional values within which they have been
socialized. Sociological institutionalism also takes a broader perspective on
institutions, including informal conventions, norms and traditions.
Historical institutionalism includes elements of both rational choice
institutionalism and sociological institutionalism. Its distinctive feature is the focus
on sequences of decisions. The central idea behind historical institutionalism is that past choices exert an influence over current choices by making some
alternatives more attractive than others.
Three key insights emerged from a case study done by Hooghe and Marks about MLG
- Decision-making authority has been dispersed over several levels of government
and is no longer confined to national governments. It also includes subnational
levels and supranational levels - The national level of government depends upon the resources of other levels of
government in order to prepare and implement these policies. - Subnational levels of government are directly involved in making cohesion
policies and do not have to rely on the willingness of their national government to
press their case in Brussels.
Multi-level governance
MLG scholars speak about ‘interconnected arenas’, in which local, regional, national and supranational levels of government depend upon each other. Policymaking is characterized by negotiation and deliberation between these different levels of government.
2 advantages of comparativism
- use an established body of theories
- insights can be put into perspective
What are the main criticisms of neo-functionalism?
It assumes integration is linear and self-sustaining, but in reality, it has progressed in fits and starts.
new intergovernmentalism
growing importance of infomal decison-making (Bickerton)
post-functionalism
importance of public opinion and national identity (Marks and Hooghe)
social constructivism
Focuses on how norms and ideas shape integration
