chapter 24 and 25 - conceptualising and theorising Flashcards
difficulties in conceptualising the EU
What are the EU’s core organisational features and what type of political system is it?
hard to answer bc:
- EU has never sought to describe or define its political character in a clear manner (it did define values + that it is an ever closer union among peoples of Europe, in which decisions are taken as openly as possible and as closely as possible to the citizen)
- the EU is in constant transition (deepening and widening) -> character changes
- EU is a highly complex and multifaceted system (-> diff definitions dependent on where the focus lies)
- in important respects the EU is unique
-> the EU is a sui generis (the only one of its kind)
sui generis
the only one of its kind
sovereignty
= legal capacity of national decision-makers to take decisions without being subject to external restraints
- emotive word associated with notions of: power, authority, independence and the exercise of will
intergovernmentalism
= arrangements whereby nation states, in situations and conditions they can control and operating mainly through their governments, cooperate with one another on matters of common interest
national sovereignty is not directly undermined bc of the notion of control
supranationalism
= states working with one another in a manner that does not allow them to retain complete control over developments
- states may be obliged to do things against their preferences and will
takes inter-state relations beyond cooperation into integration -> some loss of sovereignty
the intergov./supranational balance in the EU
60s = intergovernmentalism
- 5/6 states was open for integration and supranationalism
- France (De Gaulle) wasn’t -> withdrew from key decisionmaking forums
- 1966 Luxembourg Compromise -> intergovernmentalism
70s = reinforced intergovernmentalism
- first enlargement 1973 brought in 2 countries sceptical about supranationalism (Denmark and UK)
- economic uncertainties and recessions -> countries searched for national solutions + cautions transfering power to the Community -> intergovernmentalism
still: dev. supranationalism
- treaties increased interdependence
-
mid-80s: states more open attitude towards supranational dev.
bc ineffectiveness intergov.
!whilst relative importance of the two has varied, both remain important for the EU
- most visible in the role of the Commission, which is both supranational and intergov. (as it is constrained by preferences MS)
(idea of integration paradox: integration at unprecedented rate, but MS resisting transfers of power = not what the book argues)
principle intergov. characteristics EU
- many of the major areas of public policy decisions are still mainly taken at the national level (it does consult and coordinate, but ultimately the state decides)
- incl. foreign affairs, defense, fiscal policy, social welfare, education, health and criminal law - virtually all major decisions on general direction and policy priorities of the EU are taken in the European Council (rarely decide with majority, mostly consensus)
- Commission and EP are restricted in decision-making powers + can’t impose policies that representatives of MS don’t want
important supranational characteristics of the EU
- Commission does much to frame the EU policy agenda + important decision-maker in own right when it comes to secondary and regulatory decision-making
- QMV is now common in the Council
- influence of EP on EU decision-making is considerable (has been enhanced over the years)
- many EU decisions have binding force, have legal status
a pooling and sharing of sovereignty?
EU is quite unique in the extent to which it involves states engaging in joint action to formulate common policies and make binding decisions
-> EU states more and more intermeshed and interdependent
- tying effect: it is hard for EU decisionmaking to be reversed without creating major constitutional, legal, political and economic difficulties at EU and national level
!member states have voluntarily surrendered some of their national sovereignty and independence to the EU, but the EU does not only cause a decline in sovereignty, it is also a result of it:
- EU membership has enhanced countries ability to achieve certain objectives
- EU is an attempt of MS to increase their control, strength and influence in a rapidly changing world
-> loss of sovereignty that arises from supranationalism is counterbalanced by the collective strength of the EU as a whole
- can be argued that the only way in which EU states can retain significant control of their operating environments is by pooling and sharing their power and their sovereignty => all MS have experienced loss of sovereignty irrespective of loss bco EU membership
Conceptualisations of the EU’s political System
- states and IGOs
- federalism
- state-centrism and consociationalism
- multilevel governance
key characteristics of ‘the state’
- territoriality - state is geographically based and bound
- sovereignty - state stands above all other associations and groups within its territory and its jurisdiction extends to the whole population of the territory
- legitimacy - authority of the state is widely recognised, both internally and externally
- monopoly of governance - institutions of the state monopolise public decision-making and enforcement
key characteristics intergovernmental organisations
- IGOs are based on treaties between states, in which representatives come together to cooperate on a voluntary basis for mutual benefit. they offer a way for states to work together without formally conceding national sov.
- IGOs have no (or very little) organisational autonomy + decisions usually by consensus
- IGOs have few instruments to enforce their wil on reluctant members (but there are strong pressures for states to comply: otherwise membership is in question)
- IGOs vary in focus, purpose and geographical reach
states and intergovernmental organisations
The EU is less than a state, but more than an IGO
states
all 4 key characteristics of states are present in the EU, but only in partial ways
- territoriality: EU territory is sum total of MS territory
but: enlargements mean it is constantly shifting + its not the EU’s ‘‘own’’ territory - sovereignty: EU jurisdiction applies to the whole EU population
but: reach of sovereignty is confined to certain policy areas - legitimacy: little internal legitimacy, but firmly established external legitimacy
- monopoly of governance: only a in very few policy areas
! -> EU is far from being a state, but: traditional statehood has been breaking down -> EU seems more and more state-like
IGOs
EU more sophisticated and dev. than other IGOs
Magnette: EU is a set of institutions and rules designed to strengthen MS by encouraging cooperation
striking differences EU and IGOs:
- EU more developed and complex structure than IGOs
- no IGO has anything like EU policy responsibilities
- EU has progressed far beyond intergov. nature of IGOs
regulatory state conceptualisation
- Giandomenico Majone
Functions EU =
EU not involved in distributive/redistributive policies, but in regulating areas as competition, env., product quality, health and safety at work
Institutional structure EU = range of regulatory and non-majoritarian institutions (ICJ, Commission, regulatory agencies) that collectively constitute virtually an independent fourth branch of gov.
*other conceptualization = Vivien Schmidt’s = EU as a regional state
Federalism
pre-1991 Maastricht summit = UK embroiled in clash with other govs. about whether or not to include in TEU the EU as evolving in a federal direction’ (eventually became ‘ever closing union …’
- clash mostly bc: diff ideas definition federalism
EU federal traits:
- power is divided between central and regional decision-making institutions (EU vs MS)
- nature of division is specified in constitutional-like docs
- both levels do have important powers and responsibilities for public policy
EU falls short of the federal level:
- some responsibilities at the center (EU) are heavily dependent on acquiescense of regional units (states), e.g. unanimity in the Council
- policy balance is still tilted towards MS (apart from market-related policies)
- policy spheres that in federal systems usually belong in the center, in the EU they belong to the regional (e.g. foreign affairs, citizenship rights, defence)
*currency control as exception to this - central authorities: not able to use legitimate violence in ‘EU territory’
-> EU embodies federal principle of combining in a territorial and contractual sharing of power a degree of unit on the one hand with a respect for the interests and partial autonomy of regions on the other
+ movement in federal direction
=> EU can be conceptualised as quasi-federal system, or a special confederation (balance tilted to the regional level)