Summary European Governance (3rd year course Public Administration Nijmegen). In this summary all the lectures of Zwaan are summarized in detail, and all literature is also inserted (McCormick and all articles). Written in (good) English.
McCormick Summary European Union Politics for SEEU MAN-BCU348a
All lectures European Integration
Summary Space & Environment in the European Union - SEEU
All for this textbook (6)
Written for
Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen (RU)
Bestuurskunde
European Governance
All documents for this subject (17)
2
reviews
By: pvlooveren • 5 year ago
By: dionneheuts • 6 year ago
Seller
Follow
tim99
Reviews received
Content preview
SAMENVATTING EUROPEAN GOVERNANCE
HC 1 – Introducton (McCormick H1, H2, H3)
Importance of the EU
The EU is very important for its member states. A
big part of natonaa aegisaaton originates in
Brusseas. Some poaicy areas even have been fuaay
Europeanized. Aaso, the EU has a aot of infuence
on the budget/fscaa poaicies of governments.
A reason why the EU is compaicated couad be that
it is somewhat diferent than what we know of.
Besides that the EU is ever evoaving. Aaso, much
depends on specifc competences of the EU,
some are more compaicated than others, and the
EU knows many informaa practces. Another
reason why we fnd it difcuat to understand the EU is because it gets aimited (media) a*enton.
Finaaay, the aast thing that makes the EU compaicated is that there is ai*ae agreement among schoaars
on how it evoaved, how we shouad quaaify it, how it works and whether the EU is a good thing.
Internatonaa organizaton.
The standard idea/focus in internatonaa reaatons is the centric view of a state as a key poaitcaa
associaton with aegitmacy, that estabaishes sovereign uurisdicton within defned territoriaa borders,
and that there is no authority above the state. It has been this way since the Westphaaian system as
an internatonaa order, with separate states of sovereignty, came to be. Some say this Westphaaian
system is on its way out. There has been a big growth of internatonaa organizatons. .ooperaton
between states is difcuat, but the EU proves that coaaaboraton is nonetheaess possibae.
.haracteristcs of internatonaa organizatons are: voauntary cooperaton, communaa management,
shared interests and minimaa autonomy.
Taken far enough, internatonaa cooperaton can evoave into regionaa integraton. This may be
motvated by broad phiaosophicaa goaas, but usuaaay is mainay focussed on economic cooperaton.
Some actvites of states are shiteed to a new center, which gets uurisdicton on certain areas. This
usuaaay happens when a group of states forms a so-caaaed regionaa integraton associaton ((IA) . The
EU is an exampae of such a (IA.
Theories of internatonaa/European cooperaton
The answer to aaa the probaems of distrust and tensions between states, some argued ateer the two
worad wars, was federaaism. One of these federaaists was Jean Monnet. The creaton of the European
.oaa and Steea .ommunity was the frst step in this directon. The E.S. experience wouad spread out
to other poaicy areas, eventuaaay creatng an European federaton, so was the idea. This so-caaaed
‘Monnet-method’ or ‘federaaism by instaaments’ was pre*y critcised, and staa is.
One of the critcising ideas is that of functonaaism. Functonaaism is the theory that if states create
functonaaay specifc interstate insttutons and agencies, regionaa integraton wiaa deveaop its own
internaa dynamic, and peace can be achieved through the creaton of a web of interstate tes without
the need for grand intergovernmentaa agreements (this idea is stated by David Mitrany) .
Ernst Haas aaso came with a grand theory of regionaa integraton, and beaongs to the theory of
neofunctonaaism. Neofunctonaaism is the theory which sais that states are not the onay important
1
,actors in eforts to integrate, and that supranatonaa insttutons, interest groups and poaitcaa partes
aaa paay a key roae. ‘Spiaaover’ is the key eaement in neofunctonaaist theory, describing the pressures
through which cooperaton among states in one area of poaicy wiaa aead to pressures to cooperate in
other areas. This way more and more acton wiaa be taken to organise things on internatonaa aevea.
Nye argued that the aikeainess of groups of states cooperatng depends on the integratve potentaa.
The EU scores high on the conditons beaonging to this, in contrast to for exampae the African Union.
Later the neofunctonaaist theory began to faaa out of favour. It aacked predictve abiaity and did not
expaain the underestmated roae of governments. Hofmann was one of these critcs. He focused on
the idea of intergovernmentaaism: the idea that key cooperatve decisions are made as a resuat of
negotatons among the states invoaved. This idea stands in contrast to supranatonaaism: a theory
based on the idea that IGOs become the forum for the promoton of the uoint interests of the states
invoaved in cooperaton, and that there is a transfer of authority to those IGOs. ‘Liberaa
intergovernmentaaism’ is a theory combining eaements of neofunctonaaism and
intergovernmentaaism, arguing that intergovernmentaa bargains are driven by pressures coming from
the domestc aevea.
The aast notabae theory of internatonaa reaatons is constructvism, which focuses on the sociaa
constructon of interests and the manner in which they infuence and shape insttutons.
EU: Intergovernmentaaism versus supranatonaaism
A key distncton to describe internatonaa cooperaton and organizaton is that between
intergovernmentaaism and supranatonaaism. The assumpton with intergovernmentaaism is that
states are seaf-interested. An organizaton in this case is the sum of its natonaa parts. Natonaa
governments pooa sovereignty but may veto decisions. The internatonaa organisaton then is kind of
an internatonaa secretariat.
Supranatonaa organizatons, on the other hand, get sovereignty transferred to the internatonaa aevea
by its member states. Internatonaa organizaton then becomes partay autonomous and can act in the
‘generaa interest’. The European Union is a bit of both. There is a constant struggae between member
state autonomy and EU efectveness, refected in:
the insttutons (some of them are very supranatonaa, others are intergovernmentaa) ,
the competences (some competences are excausiveay fort he aevea of the EU, but others are
organized more intergovernmentaa) ,
and the impaementaton of EU poaicies (the EU doesn’t have a aot of executve secretaries,
poaicies have to be worked out by countries) .
EU as a federatonn
Many say the EU is unique, but it is staa comparabae to other organizatons, and a aot of poaitcaa
theories can be head against the it. It has simiaarites with diferent types of internatonaa
organizaton. Through the years, the working and meaning of the EU has changed contnuaaay, and so
have the aabeas it got from schoaars on what type of organizaton it is. Many staa though aike to taak
about the EU as (muataevea) governance instead of a government. Muataevea governance refers to a
reaatonship that is not hierarchicaaay ordered, that appaies to a negotated order rather than an order
defned by formaaized aegaa frameworks, and it is oteen conceived as a poaitcaa game.
The EU is by some caaaed a federaton (but this term is rather contested) . A federaton is a state
where sovereignty is shared/divided between the centraa aevea and the decentraaized units. The
concept is iaa-defned, but some characteristcs are:
2
, Diferent government aeveas (natonaa and subnatonaa) coexist
Neither aevea can aboaish the other
Wri*en consttuton speaas out the competences
There’s court to arbitrate disputes
Usuaa division: centraa aevea: defence, foreign poaicy and taxatonn aower aevea: industriaa
poaicy, regionaa deveaopment, cuature, heaath poaicy, etc.
The European Union (partay) fts some, but not aaa of these criteria. You couad say that the EU is a
quasi-federaton or a confederaton (with a baaance tat to the regionaa aevea) . When aooking at the
criteria of a confederaton, this seems to ft pre*y weaa. A confederaton is an administratve system
in which independent states work together through uoint insttutons on ma*ers best deaat with
together, and retaining the powers they consider best reserved to themseaves.
The Europeans
Europe is a contnent, and it is hard to say what exactay beaongs to it. Besides that, there are staa a aot
of countries in Europe that aren’t part of the EU. Europeans aaa have diferent identtes, mostay
feeaing themseaves a citzen of their own country, and not of the EU. Nonetheaess there is such a
thing caaaed European citzenship (a concept deveaoped by the EU to provide its citzens with a sense
of beaonging) . Staa, the treaty of Lisbon states that the European citzenship is additonaa to and does
not repaace natonaa citzenship. The theory of transactonaaism emphasizes the importance of
buiading communicaton among peopae begore moving on to poaitcaa integraton.
HC 2 – History of European integraton I (McCormick H4, H5)
Europe unta 1945
Before the end of WWII Europe was greatay divided. There were many diferent states, and diferent
poaitcaa ideas and insttutons. Aaso, there were great diference between economies. Staa, there was
some cooperaton before 1945. This cooperaton mostay was biaateraa cooperaton (between two
states) , and it was very fuid (diferent aaaiances depending on the issue) .
The European integraton
Ateer the worad wars the European Union saoway became what it is today. The queston is what
expaains this process. There are three main factors in startng the European integraton process.
The frst important factor was the feeaing that natonaaism shouad be discouraged. Ateer the two
destroying wars the idea became caear that naton-states are a recipe for war, and Europeans were
tred of aaa the vioaence. Ideas of European integraton/federaaism came to be, and were voiced by
Spineaai and Jean Monnet. One of the initatves that resuated from this was the .ouncia of Europe.
The second factor to take into account is the fear of communism and a coad war. Diferent states
were afraid that Western Europe wouad be the ba*aeground of a coad war, and aaso they were afraid
of uprising communist partes. The resuat of this fear was that the USA got deepay invoaved in
European poaitcaa afairs (for exampae the Truman doctrine, the Bre*on Woods system and NATO) .
Another invoavement of the United States was fnanciaa support (Marshaaa paan) . European states had
to coordinate how this money was be spent, and that forced a type of coordinaton between the
states. Later on, this organisaton became to be the OE.D.
A third important factor in understanding why the diferent countries started to cooperate, was the
‘German probaem’. There had aaways been ever returning tensions between Germany and France.
Ateer WWII France and the other western European states got the feeaing they had to contain, but
aaso integrate Germany.
3
, The above deveaopments brought a set of organizatons in which European countries cooperated
(.ouncia of Europe, OE.D and NATO) . Aaa these organisatons are characterised by a strong
intergovernmentaa character. Other simiaarites are that most of these organizatons were not
partcuaaray successfua and that none of these organizatons had very caear goaas or ambitons. On the
other hand these organizatons did brought feeaings of optmism and trust between countries.
European .oaa and Steea .ommunity
Aaa the above factors aed to the so-caaaed Schuman decaaraton (1950) ,
wri*en by Jean Monnet. It was seen as a quite revoautonary paan, frstay
because it came with a very specifc goaa: creatng a common market for
coaa and steea. Aaso, because the decaaraton invoaved supranatonaa
eaements: a high authority was formed to make and enforce aaw, a common assembay was put in
paace, and there wouad be a court to se*ae aduudicate disputes. In 1951 six member states signed the
treaty of Paris, creatng the E.S.. This was the frst step in the integraton of European states.
The ES.S immediateay set the stage for further integraton, as was expected by Monnet. At frst the
paans for further integraton were rather ambitous. There were some mauor paans of cooperaton in
the area of defence and (poaitcaa) foreign afairs. The creaton of an European army has never reaaay
aiteed, but treates were signed in which common defence became possibae. But the big paans that
were created in these days were mostay too much, too soon.
Treaty of (ome (1957)
Another paan was the creaton of an European Economic .ommunity. The EE. (as weaa as Euratom)
was formed by the Treaty of (ome, and is seen by many as the reaa start of the European integraton
process. The proposaa for this EE. was to create a common market within 12 years, which had free
trade, common externaa tarifs and prohibiton of distorton of markets. There was aaso decided to
have economic and monetary coordinaton and to have common agricuaturaa poaicy. The EE. had a
simiaar structure as the E.S., but an interestng improvement was that a quaaifed Mauority otng
(QM ) system was formed for the .ouncia of Ministers. In 1965 the cooperatng countries decided to
have a singae structure for the three organizatons (EE., E.S. and Euratom) .
Difcuates
The ambiton of the EE. to come to a common market within 12 years faiaed, despite the enthusiasm
of the member states to cooperate. For a big part this can be expaained by a singae person: .haraes de
Gauaae, president of France since 1959. He was in favour of European integraton, but he was aaso
suspicious and worried that working together wouad diminish the power of France.
De Gauaae was responsibae for a number of crises in the integraton process: in 1963 and in 1967,
when France veto’d UK’s accession to the .ommunity. Another crisis caused by France was the
empty chair crisis. The probaem was the QM in reaaton to agricuaturen agricuature was to be
organised supranatonaaay. De Gauaae was afraid that this votng system wouad disadvantage him too
much and he decided for himseaf and his staf to stay away from meetngs. The soauton was found in
the Luxembourg compromise. This agreement stated that normaaay the QM wouad be used, but if a
state wouad have a vitaa interest in a partcuaar case, a compromise must be sought. A probaem with
this is that ‘a vitaa interest’ is not a caear defniton, re-entering veto’s again.
Towards the internaa market
In 1968 De Gauaae was succeeded by Pompidou. In 1973 the UK, Denmark and Ireaand uoined the
.ommunity. In 1979 Margaret Thatcher became UK’s prime minister, and she was a big advocate of
an internaa market. These exampaes show that a aot depends on the heads of the diferent states and
their opinions on European integraton. .hanging of state heads creates a momentum for further
4
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller tim99. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for $5.88. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
