|
Showing 1 - 9 of
9 matches in All Departments
Discussing what we may learn from thinking about the EU in federal
terms represents a two-fold challenge. It is on the one hand a
matter of establishing 'how federal' the EU is (the EU's federal
challenge). On the other, the EU has federal features but is not a
state, thus raising the question of whether federal theory and
practice may have to be adapted to take proper account of the EU
(the EU's challenge to federalism). The contributions to this
collection supplement and extend existing scholarship through
focusing on two important lines of inquiry. The first focuses on
the relationship between federalism and democracy, with particular
emphasis on how federal systems respond to and deal with citizens'
interests and concerns, within and outside the political system.
Representation is explored both in the process of federalization,
and as a feature of established systems. The second line of inquiry
places the emphasis on the relationship among the governments of
federal systems. The focus is on intergovernmental relations, and
the particular merits that emanate from studying these from a
federal perspective. This book was originally published as a
special issue of Journal of European Public Policy.
This volume argues that the crisis of the European Union is not
merely a fiscal crisis but reveals and amplifies deeper flaws in
the structure of the EU itself. It is a multidimensional crisis of
the economic, legal and political cornerstones of European
integration and marks the end of the technocratic mode of
integration which has been dominant since the 1950s. The EU has a
weak political and administrative centre, relies excessively on
governance by law, is challenged by increasing heterogeneity and
displays increasingly interlocked levels of government. During the
crisis, it has become more and more asymmetrical and has intervened
massively in domestic economic and legal systems. A team of
economists, lawyers, philosophers and political scientists analyse
these deeper dimensions of the European crisis from a broader
theoretical perspective with a view towards contributing to a
better understanding and shaping the trajectory of the EU.
Discussing what we may learn from thinking about the EU in federal
terms represents a two-fold challenge. It is on the one hand a
matter of establishing 'how federal' the EU is (the EU's federal
challenge). On the other, the EU has federal features but is not a
state, thus raising the question of whether federal theory and
practice may have to be adapted to take proper account of the EU
(the EU's challenge to federalism). The contributions to this
collection supplement and extend existing scholarship through
focusing on two important lines of inquiry. The first focuses on
the relationship between federalism and democracy, with particular
emphasis on how federal systems respond to and deal with citizens'
interests and concerns, within and outside the political system.
Representation is explored both in the process of federalization,
and as a feature of established systems. The second line of inquiry
places the emphasis on the relationship among the governments of
federal systems. The focus is on intergovernmental relations, and
the particular merits that emanate from studying these from a
federal perspective. This book was originally published as a
special issue of Journal of European Public Policy.
Most EU-scholars conceive of the EU as a multilevel polity with
strong powers to regulate economic policy externalities among the
member states but little power to intervene in, let alone assume,
core functions of sovereign government ('core state powers') such
as foreign and defense policy, public finance, public
administration, and the maintenance of law and order. This book
challenges this view. Based on a systematic comparison of
integration processes in military security, fiscal policy, and
public administration, it finds steady progress in the integration
of core state powers although with substantial sectoral variation.
But the EU is not heading towards state-building. In contrast to
the historical experience of national federations, the European
integration of core state powers proceeds mostly by regulating
national capacities, not by creating European ones, and leads to
territorial fragmentation rather than increased cohesiveness.
In der gegenwlirtigen politikwissenschaftiichen Europadiskussion
ist es schon fast ein Gemeinplatz geworden, darauf zu verweisen,
daB zur Erfassung des "ganzen Elefanten" (Puchala 1971) EU eine
neue theo retische Anstrengung auf breiter Basis notwendig sei.
Nachdem je doch das einzige umfassende und ausgearbeitete
Theorieangebot, der Neofunktionalismus, von seinen Hauptvertretem
vor nunmehr zwan zig Jahren fUr zunehmend inadtiquat erkllirt
worden war, hat sich die ursprunglich stark interdisziplinlir
orientierte Integrationsforschung wieder den durch die einzelnen
Disziplinen bestimmten Fragestellun gen zugewandt, sofem sie sich
nicht auf reine Deskription oder Ein zelfallstudien beschrlinkte.
Theoretisch interessierte Arbeiten kniipfen daher immer wieder an
tatslichliche oder vermeintliche Postulate des Neofunktionalismus
an. Die einzige emsthafte Konkurrenz auf dem Feld der
Integrationstheorie scheint in Form des "neoliberalen Institu
tionalismus" oder des, Neorealismus" von der Theorie der intematio
nalen Beziehungen zu kommen. Die Kontrastierung des Neofunktio
nalismus mit den genannten Spielarten der Theorie der
intemationalen Beziehungen reproduziert jedoch nur eine Debatte,
die bereits in den sechziger Jahren gefUhrt wurde, und die sich
letztlich darum drehte, ob die damaligen Europliischen
Gemeinschaften eine neue politische Institution tiber den
Nationalstaaten darstellten, die diese in den Hin tergrund zu
drlingen drohte oder ob sie nichts anderes als ein Vehikel der nach
wie vor tiberwliltigend einfluBreichen Staaten seien, urn ihre
Herrschaftsanspruche und Gestaltungsspielrliume im Innem auch un
ter den Bedingungen intemationaler Interdependenz zu sichem. Das
bruchlose Ankniipfen an die auf hohem theoretischen Niveau
geftihrte Debatte der sechziger und fruhen siebziger Jahre bringt
je doch forschungsstrategisch mehr Nachteile als Vorteile."
Das Buch betrachtet die Charakteristika der Herbeifuhrung
kollektiver und verbindlicher Entscheidungen im internationalen
System. Untersucht werden unterschiedliche Typen, die von
regionalen Zusammenschlussen, uber internationale Regime bis zu
internationalen Organisationen reichen.Es werden dabei Fragen nach
der Entstehung, Funktionsweise und Wirkung internationaler
Institutionen gestellt. Dabei wird ein in der bisherigen Forschung
kaum beachtetes Charakteristikum deutlich: Regieren in
internationalen Institutionen ist durch die zunehmende Vernetzung
der einzelnen Institutionen gekennzeichnet, die uber die bisherige
Konkurrenz, Arbeitsteilung oder Koexistenz weit hinausgeht."
Most EU-scholars conceive of the EU as a multilevel polity with
strong powers to regulate economic policy externalities among the
member states but little power to intervene in, let alone assume,
core functions of sovereign government ('core state powers') such
as foreign and defense policy, public finance, public
administration, and the maintenance of law and order. This book
challenges this view. Based on a systematic comparison of
integration processes in military security, fiscal policy, and
public administration, it finds steady progress in the integration
of core state powers although with substantial sectoral variation.
But the EU is not heading towards state-building. In contrast to
the historical experience of national federations, the European
integration of core state powers proceeds mostly by regulating
national capacities, not by creating European ones, and leads to
territorial fragmentation rather than increased cohesiveness.
This volume argues that the crisis of the European Union is not
merely a fiscal crisis but reveals and amplifies deeper flaws in
the structure of the EU itself. It is a multidimensional crisis of
the economic, legal and political cornerstones of European
integration and marks the end of the technocratic mode of
integration which has been dominant since the 1950s. The EU has a
weak political and administrative centre, relies excessively on
governance by law, is challenged by increasing heterogeneity and
displays increasingly interlocked levels of government. During the
crisis, it has become more and more asymmetrical and has intervened
massively in domestic economic and legal systems. A team of
economists, lawyers, philosophers and political scientists analyse
these deeper dimensions of the European crisis from a broader
theoretical perspective with a view towards contributing to a
better understanding and shaping the trajectory of the EU.
|
|