Institutions and Politics of the European Union Past Paper PDF

faculty of arts 06-03-2018 | 1 06-03-2018 | 1 Institutions and Politics of the European Union Pier Domenico Tortola University of Groningen [email protected] Semester 1a, 2024/25 ...

faculty of arts 06-03-2018 | 1 06-03-2018 | 1 Institutions and Politics of the European Union Pier Domenico Tortola University of Groningen [email protected] Semester 1a, 2024/25  06-03-2018 | 2 What is the EU today? › Where has the historical evolution of European integration overviewed so far left us, from an institutional standpoint? › The EU is a hybrid entity (aka sui generis, aka n=1, etc.) Institutionally, it is located somewhere between a traditional international organization and a federal state. › It was created mostly as an (albeit unusual) international institution, and over time it has moved towards more supranationalism.  06-03-2018 | 3 Studying EU institutions › The hybrid nature of the EU makes it a fascinating subject for scholars to study, but at the same time it can also make it challenging to grasp and analyze, due to the absence of clear conceptual and empirical frames of reference. › In addition, the EU has a particularly layered and complex—and sometimes counterintuitive— institutional architecture (both formal and informal), that keeps evolving.  06-03-2018 | 4 An analytical shortcut › To make sense of the EU’s institutional structure, it may help to begin by thinking about it in ‘federal’ terms. › Starting from this intuitive reading of the EU, we can then look at the main deviations from the federal model. This will give us an analytical framework and a conceptual ‘anchor’ from which to work our way into understanding the EU.  06-03-2018 | 5 The federal analogy › The institutional core of a federal system is composed of: A chamber A federal A constitutional (or representing government (or supreme) court. constituent units executive). A chamber representing people.  06-03-2018 | 6 The federal analogy › Applied to the EU, the federal model is as follows: Council system European Court of Justice (EU Council and Commission of the EU European (EC). (CJEU). Council); European Parliament (EP).  06-03-2018 | 7 European Commission › The European Commission (EC) is the closest thing we have to a European federal executive. § It implements and enforces European policies (with the crucial help of member states); § It is the ‘guardian of the Treaties’, monitoring compliance with the latter throughout the EU territory; § It initiates EU legislation (and has a monopoly on this!); § It provides strategic leadership for the Union (in conjunction/competition with the European Council).  06-03-2018 | 8 European Commission › The EC has one president and 26 commissioners (among whom a few vice- presidents). Each Commissioner has a sectoral portfolio (much like a minister in a national government). They all serve for five years. › The President is chosen by the European Council and approved by the European Parliament (è rise and possible fall of the Spitzenkandidaten procedure).  06-03-2018 | 9 European Commission › Commissioners chosen by member states (one per MS) in consultation with President, and approved by EP (which can formally vote the Commission down only as a whole). › Each Commissioner heads one or more directorates general (DG). These constitute the core of the EU’s administration. (Myth of the pervasive European bureaucracy).  06-03-2018 | 10 Do you know the name of the current Commission president? Ursula von der Leyen (from Germany)  06-03-2018 | 11 Do you know the name of the Commissioner representing your country? Commissioners DO NOT represent member states! They are mandated to represent and further the interests of the EU as a whole. This makes the EC a distinctly supranational body.  06-03-2018 | 12 Council of Ministers › The Council of Ministers of the EU is the main body representing member states. This makes it the most distinctly intergovernmental European institution. (In our federal analogy, it can be seen as the EU’s ‘senate’). › The Council is composed of representatives (ministers) from the various MS. It changes composition (and meeting frequency) depending on the theme that is being discussed. (è General Affairs Council and Ecofin among the most important configurations).  06-03-2018 | 13 Council of Ministers › Chaired on a 6-month rotation basis by each MS (do you know who holds the presidency currently?) § Exception: the Foreign Affairs Council is always chaired by the High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (who is also a member and vice-president of the Commission). è Currently Josep Borrell (Kaja Kallas incoming). › The Council can decide by unanimity or, increasingly, by qualified majority voting (QMV - double majority: 55% of MSs and 65% of population). However, it usually seeks consensus (but states are outvoted from time to time!) › The Council is supported by the Coreper and many specialized working groups.  06-03-2018 | 14 The Eurogroup › The Eurogroup is a subset of the Ecofin, composed only of the finance ministers of the 20 Eurozone countries. Although its role is informal, it is a very important forum for (macro)economic policy. › The EG elects its own chair: the current one is Pascal Donohoe, from Ireland.  06-03-2018 | 15 European Council › The European Council is composed of the heads of government/state of the MSs (plus the EC president). It is, roughly speaking, the summit version of the Council of Ministers (but it is a distinct institution with its own rules!). › It is chaired by a permanent president (since Lisbon) serving for two and a half years. › It meets at least four times a year, and sometimes more often (e.g. in emergency situations). › The European Council makes high level (‘history-making’) decisions, including treaty revisions (under the simplified procedure); it makes/participates in top EU appointments; it provides strategic leadership for the Union.  06-03-2018 | 16 Do you know who the current president of the the European Council is? Charles Michel (from Belgium) Incoming: Antonio Costa (PT).  06-03-2018 | 17 Who leads the Union?  06-03-2018 | 18 Two presidents › The co-existence of a Commission and a Council president has often generated ambiguities, inefficiencies, and even competition regarding who should lead and represent the European Union. › This debate has gone on for many years, and relates directly to the inherent tension between intergovernmentalism and supranationalism in the EU. › Some recent proposals for reform have included the idea of merging the two presidential offices. Would that be a good thing?  faculty of arts 06-03-2018 | 1 06-03-2018 | 1 Institutions and Politics of the European Union Pier Domenico Tortola University of Groningen [email protected] Semester 1a, 2024/25  06-03-2018 | 2 Let’s start with a survey! › Go to menti.com and enter 6568023  06-03-2018 | 3 The social side of integration › Until now we have focused on the institutional structures and (some) public policies of the European Union. => top-down view of integration. › Today we flip this view to look at how society connects to politico-institutional integration => bottom up view.  06-03-2018 | 4 The EU and public opinion › European integration for a long time viewed as a an elite project. › Permissive consensus: member states’ populations generally uninvolved in European matters, which left policymakers great latitude to pursue integration. › From the 1990s: growing salience and societal awareness of EU affairs, and increasing politicization, as a result of: § EU’s involvement in ever more policy areas § EU’s involvement in more tangible and politically relevant areas § EU’s own efforts to gain more visibility among citizens  06-03-2018 | 5 The politicization of EU affairs › Politicization defined as the increasing controversiality of EU affairs. › Politicization is not necessarily a negative (au contraire!), however it has so far been driven primarily by Eurosceptics on the axis of more/less integration. § Difference between hard and soft Euroscepticism › As a result, politicization is often seen as introducing a situation of constraining dissensus § 2005 and 2016 referenda as tangible examples  06-03-2018 | 6 Measuring support for the EU › People’s support for the EU (and integration) is a key variable when it comes to EU-wide public opinion (≠ fully fledged polities, in which this support is often taken as a given). › Measuring support is, therefore very important for European institutions and policy-makers, but also for researchers, as a way to understand (some of) the dynamics of EU politics. › Voting gives us information abut public opinion, but it is a rough and infrequent measure. › Surveys are the main way to gauge public opinion. è Eurobarometer as key survey tool for the EU  06-03-2018 | 7 People’s image of the EU The constraining dissensus is more visible vis-à-vis further integration. Can we speak of a silent majority in favour of the status quo?  06-03-2018 | 8 Image of the EU by country The inverse correlation between positive and negative image seems to be strong but not perfect. There is a lot of diversity within “supporters” as well as “opponents” of the EU.  06-03-2018 | 9 Age and support for the EU Virtually across the board, the younger you are, the more likely to view the EU favourably, and vice versa.  06-03-2018 | 10 Explaining support for the EU › Public opinion on the EU is a result of a variety f factors, often at work together and overlapping in different and complex ways. è Monocausality is unlikely! › Interest-based explanations point to the (material) benefits individuals and groups reap from EU membership. For instance: § Countries: net contributors vs net receivers § Economic sectors: competitive vs non- competitive / policy beneficiaries vs non- beneficiaries § Workers: skilled (and mobile) vs unskilled  06-03-2018 | 11 Explaining support for the EU › Ideas-based explanations look at ideas and opinions on the EU that are independent of material benefits › There are many ways in which ideas can affect support for the EU. Some of these ideational pathways concern: § The democratic (vs technocratic) status of the EU; § The legitimacy of supranational institutions; § The political economy of the EU; § More generally, institutional trust. › Relevance of communication in shaping ideas, and discursive effectiveness of populist/Eurosceptic messages. => The EU itself is keen on communication!  06-03-2018 | 12 Shall we try again? › Go to menti.com and enter 1393015  06-03-2018 | 13 The EU and identity › A deeper ideational level is represented by the question of identity. è To what extent do member state populations identify with the EU? › Integration takes place among countries with strong and longstanding national identities, often defined in terms of language and/or religion. › The question for a European identity is not whether it can replace national identities (it can’t), but whether and how it can coexist with them in the context of a multi-layered identity construction.  06-03-2018 | 14 Identity across countries  06-03-2018 | 15 What is a European identity? › (Judeo-)Christianity is probably the most solid basis for a cultural definition of the European identity. However: § How does this identity sit with increasingly multi-cultural societies? § What are the implications for non-EU members with a Christian tradition? § What are the implications for non-Christian prospective members (Albania, BiH, Turkey)? › A better option for the European identity might be to be defined in civic terms, i.e. to link it to the values underpinning the integration project: liberal-democracy, peace, tolerance, rule of law. › A civic European identity is also the one promoted by European institutions, e.g. via symbols, discourse, EU citizenship, celebrations, policies.  06-03-2018 | 16 More fun with charts! › Go to menti.com and enter 24174300  06-03-2018 | 17 The role of the media › The media has a crucial role in the political processes of open societies, as the primary carrier of public communication. The media plays an important role in all three causal pathways explored here: § It transmits information; § It carries ideas, frames, discourses; § It generates “imagined communities”. › European media space (and public sphere) still very fragmented. Language differences are an important barrier. › Internet and social media have an ambiguous role: they may help overcome fragmentation, but also reinforce divisive and anti-European discourses.  faculty of arts 06-03-2018 | 1 06-03-2018 | 1 Institutions and Politics of the European Union Pier Domenico Tortola University of Groningen [email protected] Semester 1a, 2024/25  06-03-2018 | 2 Goals of this course › The IPEU course will familiarize you with the topic of European integration, a cornerstone of European politics. By the end of this course you will: § Be acquainted with the main terms and ideas pertaining to the European Union, and understand the EU’s place in European politics. § Know the main debates, issues, and dilemmas that have accompanied integration from its inception to our days. § Get a window into the broader field of political science, of which European integration is a subfield. § Gain a solid knowledge basis on which to build in future courses.  06-03-2018 | 3 Structure of the course › We will achieve the above by focusing on five key (and mutually connected) aspects of European integration, to be covered in a series of seven lectures: § Historical overview (lecture 1) § EU institutions (lectures 2-3) § The EU’s political economy (lecture 4) § Societal issues (lecture 5) § Theories of integration (lectures 6-7)  06-03-2018 | 4 Course requirements › To obtain credits for this course you must: § Pass a final exam, which will cover the readings as well as the lecture slides; § Contribute to one group vlog, marked 5.5 or up; NB: lecture attendance is not mandatory but highly recommended.  06-03-2018 | 5 Vlogs › Starting from week 2, groups of 4-5 students will prepare short videos (7-10 minutes in length) arguing for or against a given statement related to the weekly topic. › Each student will contribute to one of these 12 vlogs (sign up sheet linked in Brightspace), doing their fair share of the work (i.e. no free-riding!). › Vlogs must be structured into 3-5 well-argued points, supported by recent/current evidence (past 15 years, roughly). Other than that, style us up to you.  06-03-2018 | 6 Literature › Textbook: this is your main reading for this course. Make use of all its features! (E.g. summaries, boxes, glossary), and always keep it as your main reference! › Additional mandatory readings: see syllabus on where to find them. › Additional sources: you are encouraged to use additional sources in the context of your vlogs. › Keep an eye on the news! Good sources are: EUobserver, EurActiv, Politico.eu, in addition to more generalist outlets (such as the BBC, Reuters, Euronews, etc.)  06-03-2018 | 7 Questions? You can find additional information on the contents, organization, and requirements of the course in the syllabus (posted on Brightspace). Should you have further questions that are not already answered in the syllabus, you can always approach me after class and/or come see by appointment.  06-03-2018 | 8 Why study the European Union?  06-03-2018 | 9 Why study the EU? › First, because it is important! § Despite all its recent woes, the EU remains a key player in the global arena. § The EU is important because it impacts our lives—even if we do not always realize it. § The EU is important because it has played an important role in fostering peace and prosperity in Europe in the past six decades. § The EU is paramount in current European affairs. We cannot fully understand the recent years of economic, political and social crisis without understanding the Union and its functioning.  06-03-2018 | 10 Why study the EU? › The EU is interesting also from a more academic standpoint. § European integration is the first successful large scale experiment in voluntary sovereignty transfer. § It has generated a new political form that has challenged many existing assumptions and theories of politics. § We study the EU to understand what it is exactly, how it has come about, how it evolves, how it works, and whether it can—if it should—be reproduced elsewhere.  06-03-2018 | 11 How to study the EU? › We will devote the second part of this course to exploring analytical and theoretical approaches to the EU and the whole phenomenon of European integration. › Before we do that, we need to cover our empirical bases, by looking at how the EU came about, how it works, and what it does. This is what we will do today and for the next couple of weeks.  06-03-2018 | 12 Historical narratives › That of European integration is primarily (though not only) a story punctuated by big ‘history- making’ moments (often embodied by treaties). è Integration history as diplomatic history. › By looking at this history in its entirety, one can identify a number of connecting narratives (or trajectories) that can, taken together, help us make sense and synthesize the various parts of the story.  06-03-2018 | 13 Sectoral integration › Integration history is above all the story of how a number of member states have shared, pooled or even altogether given up competences supranationally in an increasing number of policy areas. › Started in the areas of coal and steel production, integration has moved gradually, and more or less steadily, to more sectors over time. Today, the EU acts in virtually all public policy sectors. › Progressive sectoral integration has played an important role on the theoretical side of EU studies by inspiring neo-functionalism (more on this in week 6!).  06-03-2018 | 14 Vertical integration › As integration has involved more and more sectors, it has done so also by means of, on average, increasingly centralized institutions. › Competence transfer is not an ‘all or nothing’ business. It can take place in many ways which imply different degrees of sovereignty transfer. In EU studies we speak of ‘intergovernmentalism’ vs ‘supranationalism’. › Vertical integration has proceeded at different paces in different areas. › Some argue that the overall trend of vertical integration has slowed down (or even ended) starting with the Eurozone crisis. (But what about Covid-19?)  06-03-2018 | 15 Geographic expansion › The group of member states has not remained the same: from the original six, the integration process has expanded to include 28 members. (The newest among them is Croatia, which joined in 2013) In 2020 the EU lost, for the first time, a member state due to Brexit. This has taken us down to 27 members. 06-03-2018 | 16  06-03-2018 | 17 Differentiation › As the EU has become bigger, and integrated in more areas, it has become more and more difficult for member states to move all together. › As a result, European integration has been an increasingly differentiated enterprise (particularly from Maastricht). › Terms such as Europe à la carte, multi-speed EU, variable geometry, core EU, etc. all refer to the broad idea of differentiated integration. › For some, more differentiation is the only viable future of the EU after the crisis.  06-03-2018 | 18 In some cases, differentiation is a result of EU rules (e.g. euro membership for CEE members).  06-03-2018 | 19 Politicization › Over time, as integration has expanded to more, and more contentious policy areas, it has also become more ‘politicized’. › Politicization is, in a nutshell, the extent to which integration is a subject of (domestic) political debates and conflicts. › The recent crises of the EU have marked a great increase in its politicization (with Euroskepticism and populism as important manifestations).  06-03-2018 | 20 Measuring politicisation: The EU in the media Source: T. Silva et al., “Highlighting supranational institutions? An automated analysis of EU politicisation (2002–2017)” West European Politics 45, 4, 2022.  06-03-2018 | 21 A few historical milestones › The idea of European integration precedes WWII, but it gained momentum after 1945. › Intellectual ferment and institutional innovations after the war: e.g. Benelux, CoE, NATO, OEEC. › European integration starting date 1951. Schuman declaration and ECSC treaty: functional integration in coal and steel (two important sectors for war-making). Six founding members: F, I, DE, Benelux.  06-03-2018 | 22 A few historical milestones › Failed attempt of the EDC. This debacle is often seen as the failure of the more directly political (or ‘federal’) approach to integration. › 1957 Rome treaties: EEC and Euratom are added to the ECSC. This marks the beginning of European integration as we know it today. The functional and economic approach prevails. › Mid-1960s: European Court of Justice activism (direct effect and primacy of European law) › 1965-66: Empty chair crisis and Luxembourg compromise. Intergovernmentalism is reaffirmed.  06-03-2018 | 23 A few historical milestones › 1970s Eurosclerosis. No major initiatives of vertical integration. But first enlargement in 1973: UK, IE, DK. › 1981 second enlargement: GR. › 1986 third enlargement: ES, PT. › 1986 Single European Act. First treaty after Rome, and launch of the single market project (to be completed by 1992). Expands majority voting in Council and introduces greater role for EP. › 1991 Maastricht treaty. EU established. Three pillars: Communities, JHA, CFSP. Establishment of the monetary union. › 1995 fourth enlargement: AT, FI, SW.  06-03-2018 | 24 A few historical milestones › 1996 Amsterdam Treaty (expands community method, communitarizes JHA, creates High Representative). › 1999-01 introduction of the euro › 2002 Nice Treaty (reforms the EC composition for next enlargement, changes voting system in Council). › 2004-07 ‘Big bang’ enlargement: CEE plus Malta and Cyprus. › 2002-05 Constitutional treaty and its failure › 2007 Lisbon Treaty: current setup of the EU  06-03-2018 | 25 A few historical milestones › 2008/9 beginning of the euro crisis › 2012 ‘whatever it takes’ (also various institutional reforms around this period: ESM, Fiscal compact, banking union, etc.) › 2016-20: Brexit › 2020: Coronavirus pandemic: the EU introduces a number of important policy initiatives, above all “Next generation EU”.  06-03-2018 | 26 Where are we today? › Sectoral integration: Europe is more integrated than ever. Current debates concern further steps in economic areas (e.g. fiscal integration) and beyond (e.g. military integration). › Vertical integration. The jury still out on the past few years: in some respects the Eurozone crisis has introduced more intergovernmentalism, in others there have been advances of supranationalism. Something similar (but perhaps more in favour of supranationalism) can be said about the Covid-19 pandemic.  06-03-2018 | 27 Where are we today? › Geographic expansion: Brexit has just happened, and it does not look set to generate a domino effect. On the other hand, there is still a list of countries that want (and will) join the EU. › Differentiation: while DI seems the most likely ‘name of the game’ for the future (e.g. PESCO, or the Eurozone budget) we should not forget recent movements towards less differentiation, in the first place Brexit and the completion of previous enlargements. › Politicization: There is no doubt that politicization is at a historical high. But is this necessarily bad?  faculty of arts 06-03-2018 | 1 06-03-2018 | 1 Institutions and Politics of the European Union Pier Domenico Tortola University of Groningen [email protected] Semester 1a, 2024/25  06-03-2018 | 2 Recall the federal analogy! Council system European Court of Justice (EU Council and Commission of the EU European (EC). (CJEU). Council); European Parliament (EP).  06-03-2018 | 3 European Parliament › It is the body representing EU citizens, and the only one directly elected (since 1979). Its institutional and political role has steadily increased over time. › Currently composed of 720 members (MEPs) allocated unequally among MSs. MEPs are elected for five years through proportional electoral systems. è Latest election: June 2024 › The EP is chaired by a president (currently Roberta Metsola, from Malta), serving a two and a half year term.  06-03-2018 | 4 European Parliament › The EP meets in Brussels (where most of its committee work is done), as well as Strasbourg for most plenaries.  06-03-2018 | 5 European Parliament › The EP participates in EU legislation and budgetary process; ratifies international agreements; participates in top appointments; scrutinizes the EC (and other EU supranational bodies). › As in national parliaments, much of the EP work is done in sectoral parliamentary committees. › EP votes are usually divided along party (as opposed to national) lines. § However, we have no such thing as (mass) Europarties yet!  06-03-2018 | 6 EP Party families Currently, there are eight political groups in the EP. The EPP and S&D remain the largest ones, albeit historically in relative decline.  06-03-2018 | 7 European Parliament elections › The EP is the EU’s most democratic institution. Yet, its election is usually seen as ‘second-order’—i.e. less important than national elections—and turnout is usually not very high (51% in the last two elections: growing but still rather low). › EP elections are managed nationally, campaigns are run by national parties, and national politics has a strong influence on results. › It remains to be seen whether the Spitzenkandidaten procedure can increase transnational politicization.  06-03-2018 | 8 Ordinary Legislative Procedure › EU legislation comes mostly in the form of regulations and directives, and it is adopted for the most part through the so-called ordinary legislative procedure (OLP). › The OLP (previously ’co-decision’) has expanded to more and more policy areas over time, increasing the role of the EP and therefore supranationalism. › The OLP is an example of symmetric bicameralism: both legislative chambers (EP and EU Council) must agree in order to pass a piece of legislation. This guarantees that both the interests/preferences of the people and member states are taken into account.  06-03-2018 | 9 Ordinary Legislative Procedure  06-03-2018 | 10 The OLP in action  06-03-2018 | 11 The Court of Justice › The Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) is the ‘constitutional court’ of the Union. It sits in Luxembourg. › The CJEU is composed of the European Court of Justice and the General Court. They have respectively 27 and 54 judges appointed by member states for a renewable six-year term, but highly independent in their functions è Similar to the Commission.  06-03-2018 | 12 Competence of the CJEU › The CJEU works as the apex of a decentralized court system vis-à-vis EU law: the latter must be applied and upheld by all member states courts. › However, the CJEU’s competence only extends to areas covered by EU law. Where only national law is concerned, the CJEU is not competent. è CJEU ≠ Supreme court of appeal  06-03-2018 | 13 CJEU actions › Much of the CJEU’s work consists of preliminary rulings, with which the Court provides national courts with its authoritative interpretation of the EU’s treaties. § Preliminary rulings are indirect actions, because in these cases the CJEU is not the first court to be engaged. › The Court can also act directly, mostly in infringement proceedings (against MSs) and judicial review (annulment actions).  06-03-2018 | 14 The CJEU and integration › Through its actions, Court has played a crucial role in the development of EU institutions, in particular in the direction of greater integration and supranationalism, e.g.: § Van Gend en Loos (1962) on ‘direct effect’ § Costa v ENEL (1964) on the supremacy of EU law › However, more recently there have been some signals of a reversal of the Court’s ‘judicial activism’ (e.g. with the 2014 Dano and the 2016 Garcia-Nieto judgments).  faculty of arts 06-03-2018 | 1 06-03-2018 | 1 Institutions and Politics of the European Union Pier Domenico Tortola University of Groningen [email protected] Semester 1a, 2024/25  06-03-2018 | 2 The EU’s political economy › Political economy refers to the intersection and interactions between the political and economic spheres. › European integration is, in relative terms, more advanced in economic areas, hence political economy is a prominent part of EU studies. › Today we will look at two key areas of the EU’s political economy: the Single Market and the Economic and Monetary Union (EMU). In so doing, we will: § Continue our familiarization with the development and work of the EU; § Get acquainted with some key concepts and ideas pertaining to these two policy areas; § Have a look at some important recent debates in European integration and politics.  06-03-2018 | 3 Positive vs negative integration › Before looking at the specifics of our two policy areas, let’s introduce two more general concepts cutting across all policy areas of the EU: positive and negative integration. › These terms refer to two different ways in which European societies can be (and have been) integrated: § Negative integration proceeds by subtraction, namely by removing barriers between societies and political systems. § Positive integration proceeds by addition, namely by building shared institutions and competences. › NB: the two terms do not have a normative meaning in this context (so, negative ≠ bad and positive ≠ good).  06-03-2018 | 4 The single market › The single market is one of the defining achievements of the EU, and possibly the one policy area that can be seen as a “necessary condition” for European integration. › All EU countries participate in the single market, as well as some non-EU ones (European Economic Area, plus Switzerland). è External differentiation › The single market contains aspects of negative as well as positive integration. (In fact, many Euro- myths concern the latter!)  06-03-2018 | 5 What is a single market? Source: P.M. Crowley (2006) “Is there a Logical Integration Sequence After EMU?” Journal of Economic Integration 21(1): 1- 20.  06-03-2018 | 6 The single market process › The construction of the single market started practically with the beginning of the European Communities. The technical and political complexity of this subject, however has caused the process to move in fits and starts. › The single most important juncture for the development of the single market was the 1986 Single European Act, and the connected 1992 programme. › Over time, the CJEU has also played an important role in advancing the single market via its rulings (recall the concept of judicial activism!)  06-03-2018 | 7 The single market process The process is still ongoing: the single market is far from complete, and in fact its targets keep changing, due to, e.g., changes in production and consumption technology. è E.g. the challenges of digitalization.  06-03-2018 | 8 The four freedoms › Central in the EU’s single market project are the so-called four freedoms, indicating the free movement of: § Goods and services: outcomes of production § Capital and labour (people): factors of production › Each of the four has presented, and still presents specific societal and political challenges. These make the single market often highly contentious, despite its (often) highly technical appearance.  06-03-2018 | 9 The EU as a neoliberal order? › In principle, the single market does not pre- determine the EU’s economic model and variety of capitalism. › The project is often depicted (esp. by critics) as a neoliberal one, namely one in which market forces should determine economic outcomes (see for instance state-aid rules). › This is, however, an open debate: the neoliberal characterization clashes with many exceptions, and the more general view of Europe as a social market economy.  06-03-2018 | 10 Compensatory measures › The “social” in the social market economy is still done for the most part at the member state level è Welfare states are national (and local) rather than supranational. › The EU has, however, taken an increasingly large role in interterritorial redistribution via its regional (aka structural) and cohesion policies. In part, the rationale for these is compensatory vis-à-vis the “losers” of the single market (and economic integration more generally).  06-03-2018 | 11 Economic and Monetary Union › The single market is mostly about microeconomic policies, namely about regulating the economic activity of private actors, such as households and firms. › With the EMU, we enter the sphere of macroeconomic policies, involving the use of tool, on the part of governments, to affect the economy as a whole.  06-03-2018 | 12 Economic and Monetary Union › Governments have two main tools for macroeconomic policy: fiscal and monetary policy. § Fiscal policy concerns the levels of taxation and public spending (and the differences between the two: budget surplus or deficit). § Monetary policy concerns the supply and regulation of money in the economic system. › The EU operates in both areas, but in a very uneven fashion: monetary integration is far more advanced than fiscal integration.  06-03-2018 | 13 European monetary integration › As in other areas, the process of monetary integration has unfolded over a number of years. The start can be located roughly in the late 1960s and early 1970s. › A key juncture, however was the Maastricht Treaty, which set criteria and a timeline for the creation of the common currency (the euro, eventually adopted in 1999-2002). › Unlike the single market, the monetary union is an area of internally differentiated integration: only 20 out of 27 EU member states are in the eurozone. However only DK is allowed a formal opt-out! The rest must eventually join—at least in principle.  06-03-2018 | 14 European Central Bank › Monetary policy is also distinctive because it is in the hands of a European Central Bank (ECB), which resides in Frankfurt (DE). › The ECB is highly independent (hence undemocratic by design) and bound by a mandate of price stability è 2% target inflation. › In recent years the ECB has become more proactive in its monetary interventions (especially under Mario Draghi— “Whatever it takes”, Outright Monetary Transactions, and Quantitative Easing). › However, greater activism during the euro crisis has also raised a number of issues pertaining to the legitimacy, accountability, and even politicization of the ECB.  06-03-2018 | 15 Fiscal policy in the EU › Usually, monetary and (much of) fiscal policy are conducted at the same governmental scale because they strongly affect one another. è Foreshadowing the notion of spillover! › The euro changed the scale of monetary policy from national to supranational, but what about fiscal policy? › Taxation and public spending within the EU remain predominantly at the national level. The EU has a tiny budget compared to the member states: ≈1% of its gross domestic product (GDP).  06-03-2018 | 16 Fiscal policy in the EU › In order to mitigate this institutional imbalance the EU has a stability and growth pact (SGP) setting limits to the levels of national deficits and public debts. › By tying member states’ hands, the SGP generated another problem, i.e. depriving national economies of the fiscal means to tackle asymmetric shocks (i.e. trouble affecting only some parts of the eurozone) › These economic shortcomings of the SGP are compounded by its political issues, above all its legitimacy, inflexibility, and the inconsistency of its implementation.  06-03-2018 | 17 The limits of the SGP › The one-size-fits-all, balanced-budget approach of the SGP is a typical expression of the so-called ordoliberal macroeconomic model (as opposed to a Keynesian one). › This model’s limitations became evident during the eurozone crisis (2009-12), in which austerity policies ended up wreaking economic and social havoc (e.g. Greece), and the dreaded bailouts had eventually to be implemented anyway.  06-03-2018 | 18 Whither European fiscal policy? › The Covid-19 crisis marked a departure from the ordoliberal model: § Suspension of the SGP, to allow member states to spend on welfare measures. § Introduction of the Next Generation EU (NGEU) package, and issuing of EU-level public debt. › It remains to be seen how durable such a departure proves to be. § New SGP introduced in 2024: More flexibility and tailoring to state-specific needs and situation. § Draghi report: plea for, among others, more common joint borrowing to finance investments.  faculty of arts 06-03-2018 | 1 06-03-2018 | 1 Institutions and Politics of the European Union Pier Domenico Tortola University of Groningen [email protected] Semester 1a, 2024/25  06-03-2018 | 2 Theories of integration › Integration theory is a distinct field within political science that tries to explain the ‘puzzle’ of integration among nation-states, and its transformations. › Integration theory has always been closely connected to the empirical phenomenon of the EC/EU (recall the n=1 problem!) As a result, theoretical debates and evolution have been affected strongly by developments on the ground. › The evolution of integration theory has concerned not only the success of specific theories, but also broader shifts between the sub-fields of international relations and comparative politics.  06-03-2018 | 3 Federalism › European federalism was a political doctrine developed in the WWII years by a number of anti- fascist politicians and intellectuals, as a project for post-War Europe. › Its most famous formulation is the Ventotene manifesto, written by Altiero Spinelli and Ernesto Rossi. The manifesto advocated a Europe-wide federation to avoid war, oppression and exploitation, which were typical of (capitalist) nation-states.  06-03-2018 | 4 Federalism › Federalism is less an explanatory theory of the type political scientists study, than a normative theory, and a political manifesto. › Yet, federalism is relevant for us because: § it does contain important assumptions about the functioning of (European) politics (at least two: an institutionalist one, and an ideational one); § it provides an institutional end-point for teleological theories such as neo-functionalism; § the Europe it envisions is an important (either positive or negative) frame of reference in debates on integration (the ‘F-word’).  06-03-2018 | 5 The failure of federalism › Federalism was closely connected to the historical juncture of post-WWII Europe, and the window of opportunity this juncture had opened. › Once that window closed—most tangibly with the failure of the EDC in 1954—federalism waned as a political doctrine. (It has since remained a rather marginal movement in European politics). › Instead of the ‘big bang’, political approach advocated by federalism, European integration proceeded through a sectoral and economic approach embodied by the three original communities (ECSC, EEC, Euratom).  06-03-2018 | 6 Neo-functionalism › Neo-functionalism is the first theory of (European) integration in the social-scientific meaning of the term (i.e. explanatory and empirical). › NF was mainly developed by a number of political scientists based in the United States, most notably Ernst Haas (The Uniting of Europe, 1958), Leon Lindberg, Philippe Schmitter. › Initially, NF had comparative ambitions, which were quite soon abandoned to concentrate exclusively on Europe.  06-03-2018 | 7 Neo-functionalism › Two core tenets of NF are institutional functionalism (i.e. institutions can be explained by the functions they perform), and a largely materialist worldview. › Common arrangements and institutions are created to satisfy the demands of economic and other societal actors (e.g. producers who gain from a common regulatory framework). › Sectoral integration has two effects: 1) it generates pressures to integrate in adjacent areas (spillover effect); 2) it creates common institutions, which have an interest in further integration, and lobby for it.  06-03-2018 | 8 Neo-functionalism › As integration proceeds from one sector to the next, it eventually arrives at more controversial areas. As integration shifts from ‘low politics’ to ‘high politics’, political contestation and related dynamics will also move to the supranational level. › European integration will be fully politicized when both political dynamics, loyalties, and interest representation will be shifted to the supranational level. › Neo-functionalism is a teleological theory, i.e. a theory tracing a transformational trajectory, whose logical ending point is supranational federalism. (This is one of the aspects that makes it different from traditional functionalism ).  06-03-2018 | 9 Neo-functionalism › NF is an intuitive theory that contains a number of original and valuable propositions, in the first place the notion of functional spillover. On the other hand, it has been accused of depicting integration as an overly smooth process. › Empirically, NF’s performance is mixed. It can explain certain aspects and phases of integration but it has a hard time accounting for other—including, arguably, the very origins of integration with the ECSC. › NF declined in the 1960s/70s (as we shall see in the next slide), but made a comeback in the 1990s, mostly as a result of Maastricht and the single market. › Today it remains an important theory of integration, which provides us with important ‘pieces of puzzle’, in the context of a broader eclectic turn in European integration.  06-03-2018 | 10 Intergovernmentalism › The slowing down of integration in the 1960s/70s— epitomized by the empty chair crisis, first, and later taking the form of ‘Eurosclerosis’—led to increasing skepticism towards NF and its teleological supranationalism. › This paved the way for the rise of intergovernmentalism as an alternative paradigm of integration, which puts forward a state-centric view of European politics, in which the nation-state is a self-interested and self-preserving actor.  06-03-2018 | 11 Intergovernmentalism › For intergovernmentalists, integration (nay, cooperation) is always led by states, and always serves their interests. › International institutions are there to smoothen and facilitate inter-state cooperation (primarily in low politics areas). They can never challenge their vital interests, let alone deprive them of their sovereignty. › Intergovernmentalism’s view of international politics is cyclical as opposed to teleological.  06-03-2018 | 12 Types of intergovernmentalism › Intergovernmentalism comes in two main guises: classical (CI) and liberal (LI). › CI is closely connected to classical realism in IR, and is primarily connected to the work of Stanley Hoffmann. › CI sees the state as a unitary actor driven by its national interests, defined primarily in terms of power and security. However, similar to classical realism, CI does not completely overlook more ideational questions, in the first place the issue of nationalism and legitimacy. › For CI, the Cold War played a key role in the origins and development of European integration.  06-03-2018 | 13 Liberal intergovernmentalism › LI is a more recent, and by now mainstream, version of intergovernmentalism. It was developed primarily by Andrew Moravcsik (The Choice for Europe, 1998). › As far as inter-state relations go, LI is similar to CI. It sees the state as the key actor whose actions, including integration, are driven by self interest. Like CI, it sees the EU as little more than an international organization, always under the control of (the strongest) member states. › However, compared to CI, LI tends to have a more rationalistic interpretation of state behavior, in which institutions are seen as regimes that, among other things, reduce transaction costs, make commitments credible, create focal points and solve incomplete contracts. › Not much space for considerations other than material interests.  06-03-2018 | 14 Liberal intergovernmentalism › LI’s most important departure from CI regards the definition of state interests and preferences. › While CI rests on the notion of a single and relatively stable national interest, for LI there is no such thing. State preferences are always defined by domestic political interactions. › LI has a pluralist view of domestic politics, in which the state is mostly a mediator among competing (and mainly economic) actors and interests. The balance of power among the latter defines the preferences that the state then furthers in its relationships with its counterparts. › Integration is, in sum, always the result of a strategic interaction played on two levels: international and domestic (notion of ‘two-level game’).  06-03-2018 | 15 Liberal intergovernmentalism › Similar to NF, (liberal) intergovernmentalism contains a number of interesting and valuable observations about European integration, but also some more debatable positions. › Much the same goes for its empirical performance, which is good in certain areas of integration but rather weak in others. › All in all, LI remains an important player in the current scholarly debate on the EU.  06-03-2018 | 16 To recap › Neofunctionalism and (Liberal) intergovernmentalism are comprehensive theories (aka paradigms) of European integration. › They differ in their assumptions about the drivers of (European) politics, their identification of key actors, and their interpretation of the very nature of the EC/EU. › Their theoretical breadth makes, at the same time, empirically vulnerable (because the more a theory covers, the higher the chances to encounter disconfirming evidence), but also more difficult to falsify. › Today, both NF and intergovernmentalism tend to be interpreted less comprehensively, as analytical tools that can explain certain aspects of European integration without necessarily providing covering laws for the whole of it.  06-03-2018 | 17 A question for you › Which approach, between the ones we have explored today (NF, CI, LI), makes the most sense to you in light of current European affairs?  faculty of arts 06-03-2018 | 1 06-03-2018 | 1 Institutions and Politics of the European Union Pier Domenico Tortola University of Groningen [email protected] Semester 1a, 2024/25  06-03-2018 | 2 Newer theories of integration › In recent decades, new theoretical approaches on European integration have emerged to challenge (and/or add to) the classical approaches, as a result of two (partly overlapping) factors: § Broader intellectual shifts in the study of politics, with the emergence and growth of new(ish) paradigms. § Events and transformations on the ground (recall n=1!), including the EU’s increasing federalization, which has led to a domestic turn in EU studies (i.e. studying the Union as a political system). › Today we will overview three such new approaches: § Social constructivism § New institutionalism § Europeanization theory  06-03-2018 | 3 Social constructivism › The single main idea of constructivism is that, in order to understand politics, we need to look at social constructions. › Social constructions are shared understandings of the meaning of the various parts of the (political) world, and of how these parts are (or ought to be) ordered. › Think about the world as being made of a set of observable raw data/material and the meaning(s) attached to it. Could you make sense of the former without the latter? è Social constructions are neither objective nor subjective. They are intersubjective.  06-03-2018 | 4 Types of constructions › Intersubjective constructions are part and parcel of social life. In analyzing politics, we usually focus on a few of them, such as: § Culture § Ideologies § Cognitive ideas § Normative ideas § Identities › These constructions partly overlap, can be more or less inclusive, and operate at different temporal ranges. › But they all contribute to explaining the socio-political world as independent and/or intervening factors.  06-03-2018 | 5 Contra materialism and rationalism › Constructivism is opposed to materialist and rationalist approaches to politics (and European integration). § Social facts are as important as material ones in understanding politics. § Political agents do not follow exogenously given preferences in a linear fashion. Preferences are contextual and may change over time and place (constitution is more important than causation).  06-03-2018 | 6 A few examples on the EU › Constructivism is not a specific theory of integration but rather a broad worldview and approach to politics, which generates a number of mid-range propositions on European affairs. › Let’s look at two episodes that have been examined through a constructivist lens: § Enlargement to the post-communist countries § British national identity and Brexit  06-03-2018 | 7 Why did the EU expand in 2004-07? › In interest-based terms, the accession of ten post- communist countries does not make much sense from the western standpoint. › The 2004-07 enlargement can only be fully explained by looking at a number of interconnected ideational factors, such as: § The geographic, historical and cultural construction of ‘Europe’; § The moral duty to ’welcome back’ CCE countries into the community of Europeans; § The value attached to democracy by the EU.  06-03-2018 | 8 How to explain Brexit? › Brexit is difficult to explain from a cost-benefit standpoint: on balance, Britain is more likely to lose than to gain from it. › In part, Brexit resulted from the successful hijacking of the public discourse by certain populist arguments (on sovereignty, immigration, etc.) › These arguments, however, built on a number of more longstanding traits of the UK’s culture and national identity, such as its insularity, glorious history, and generally, its self-perception as distinct from the rest of Europe.  06-03-2018 | 9 New institutionalism › The label ’new institutionalism’ includes several theoretical approaches to politics sharing the view that institutions matter in explaining political outcomes. › Institutions are the formal and informal rules that govern political life. › Here we examine only two variants of new institutionalism: § Rational choice (or rationalist) institutionalism (RI) § Historical institutionalism (HI) › Like constructivism, institutionalism is a broad paradigm used to generate specific propositions on European integration and affairs.  06-03-2018 | 10 Rationalist institutionalism › RI is an extension of the rational choice approach, which assumes that socio-political actors maximize a priori and fixed preferences. › Institutions are intervening factors in political dynamics, which act as a filter between the utility that is maximized by actors and political outcomes, by altering actors’ preferences, strategies, behavior. › They do so by e.g. structuring interactions, eliminating transaction costs, providing focal points, disseminating information, increasing predictability, in general altering expectations.  06-03-2018 | 11 The prisoner’s dilemma Anthony and Bob are arrested after a robbery, and interrogated in separate rooms. The police has no witnesses, so it can only prove the case against them if at least one of the alleged robbers testifies to the crime. Each person can either cooperate with the other and remain silent, or defect from the gang and testify for the prosecution: § If they both remain silent, then the authorities will only be able to convict them on a lesser charge: one year in jail each. § If one testifies and the other does not, then the one who testifies will go free and the other will get three years. § If both testify against the other, each will get two years in jail for being partly responsible for the robbery. 06-03-2018 | 12  06-03-2018 | 13 Institutions and collective action › The prisoner’s dilemma exemplifies the problems of collective action and their possible solutions. › In this specific case, institutions can foster cooperation by generating a ‘long shadow of the future’, therefore making it rational to mutually cooperate. › NB: institutions do not alter the initial self-interest of the actors. They change the outcome simply by changing expectations, thus channeling these interests into more cooperative behavior.  06-03-2018 | 14 A few RI examples › The prisoner’s dilemma logic should sound familiar to you: liberal intergovernmentalism uses RI to explain the existence and role of EU institutions. › Voting rules in the EU Council of Ministers affects the agenda setting power and strategies of the Commission.  06-03-2018 | 15 Historical institutionalism › HI attributes a larger role to institutions, in the first place by highlighting their constitutive role vis-à-vis actors’ preferences, and focusing more on institutional actors and their preferences. › Above all, HI is distinctive for its focus on the temporal dimension of politics (hence ‘historical’). § Existing institutions are the product of past decisions and political dynamics.  06-03-2018 | 16 Path dependence › A central concept in HI is path dependence. Political dynamics and development may follow a number of different paths, and once a system embarks on one specific path, it is likely to remain on it. › What we do today depends on what we did yesterday (e.g. QWERTY keyboard).  06-03-2018 | 17 Path dependence › Institutions are a strong source of path dependence: they self-preserve and self-reinforce over time in a number of ways. § E.g. by constituting preferences, creating constituencies, generating ramifications, and creating actors possessing their own preferences and resources. › Institutions, therefore, are sticky: once they are created, they tend to stay in place, and affect subsequent political interactions and outcomes, sometimes in unintended ways. è Institutions are not always explicable in functional terms!  06-03-2018 | 18 Critical junctures › Path dependence makes it particularly important to identify, study and understand the point at which a path begins. This point in time is known as a critical juncture. › At a critical juncture, political actors are unconstrained by institutions, hence free to create institutions as they wish. Once they make that choice, the path begins. § To make sense of critical junctures and path dependence, think of a cat climbing a tree… › HI is better at explaining continuity than change.  06-03-2018 | 19 A few HI examples › Common Agricultural Policy: once created, it generated it own constituency of actors interested in its preservation. Over time this constituency has probably strengthened due to entrenched preferences and expectations, and adaptation to the policy. › European Commission: once established it acquired its own prerogatives, structure and resources, which it has used to reinforce these further, and so on.  06-03-2018 | 20 Europeanization theory › With ‘Europeanization’ we indicate primarily the consequences of European integration on member states, as regards policy, polity, and politics › This top-down view of Europeanization turns the question of integration on its head: not how states create integration but how the latter affects states. › Europeanization is less a theory than an analytical framework, which can be used for a variety of explanatory arguments.  06-03-2018 | 21 The standard model Integration Goodness of fit instance (e.g. a and adaptational piece of EU pressures legislation) Outcome (in terms of domestic Mediating factors change)  06-03-2018 | 22 The standard model › The level of the mediating factors, and connected causal mechanisms, is the core of explanations of Europeanization. › A variety of argumentative pathways can be deployed here, covering all the ‘families’ of variables covered so far (interests, ideas, institutions), to explain change, or lack thereof.  06-03-2018 | 23 Final words › Do you have questions on anything covered in this lecture series? › Do you have questions on the final exam? › Keep following the news, and try to connect them to what we studied in this course!