This cutting edge handbook presents the main theoretical and empirical issues involved in current Europeanization research. As a critical review of the state of the art it evaluates the achievements and shortcomings of the growing Europeanization literature. As a reference book at advanced level it sets the parameters for Europeanization research in the coming years. All twenty-five chapters are written by the foremost authoritative scholars in the field.
List of Contributors
PART ONE: INTRODUCTION
Challenges of a New Research Agenda; M.Vink & P.Graziano
PART TWO: THEORY AND METHODS
The Three Worlds of Regional Integration Theory; J.Caporaso
Conceptual Issues; C.M.Radaelli & R.Pasquier
Theorizing Europeanization; S.Bulmer
PART THREE: POLITICS & POLITY
Candidate Countries and Conditionality; F.Schimmelfennig & U.Sedelmeier
Regulatory Governance; D.Levi-Faur
State Structures; P.Bursens
Core Executives; B.Laffan
Parliamentary Scrutiny; R.Holzhacker
Political Parties and Party Systems; P.Mair
Interest Groups and Social Movements; R.Eising
PART FOUR: POLICIES
Policy Implementation; U.Sverdrup
Agricultural Policy; C.Roederer-Rynning
Environmental Policy; T.A.Börzel
Cohesion Policy; I.Bache
Social Policy; G.Falkner
Telecommunications Policy; V.Schneider & R.Werle
Economic Policy; K.Dyson
Anti-Discrimination Policy; V.Guiraudon
Asylum Policy; S.Lavenex
Foreign Policy; R.Wong
PART FIVE: CONCLUSION
Some Promises and Pitfalls of Europeanization Research; D.Lehmkuhl
Does the European Union change the domestic politics and institutions of its member states? This study traces the effects of Europeanization and the impact of the EU on national court systems, territorial politics, societal networks, public discourse, identity and citizenship norms. The European Union, the authors find, does indeed make a difference – even in Germany, France and the UK. In many cases, EU rules and regulations incompatible with domestic institutions have created pressure for national governments to adapt. This volume examines the conditions under which this “adaptational pressure” has led to institutional change in the member states.
This article reviews the literature on Europeanization beyond the group of EU member, “quasi-member” and applicant states. It uses the analysis of Europeanization in applicant states as a theoretical starting point to ask if, how and under which conditions we can expect domestic effects of European integration beyond Europe. Focusing on Europeanization effects in the areas of regionalism, democracy and human rights, and the literature on the European Neighborhood Policy in particular, the article collects findings on the strategies and instruments as well as the impact and effectiveness of the EU. The general conclusion to be drawn from the theoretical and empirical literature reviewed is one of low consistency and impact.
In May 2004, eight former Eastern Bloc countries joined the European Union: the three Baltic republics, Poland, Hungary, the Czech and Slovak republics, and Slovenia. What is involved in “accession”? How have accession dynamics affected and been affected by the domestic politics of candidate countries and their adoption of EU rules? In this carefully designed volume of original essays, the editors have brought together a group of scholars with firsthand research experience in the new member-states of Central and Eastern Europe. Framed by opening and concluding chapters by Frank Schimmelfennig and Ulrich Sedelmeier that outline several aspects of preparation for accession, the empirical case studies discuss a variety of topics, including democracy and human rights, the reform of state administrations and economic, social, and environmental policies. This book demonstrates the importance of the credibility and the costs of accession conditionality for the adoption of EU rules in Central and Eastern Europe
Is there something new in recent research on Europeanisation? Or should we go back to what we already know about political integration in Europe and avoid the term? This article reviews recent work in four steps: the identification of the specific domain of Europeanisation; the relationship between Europeanisation, on the one hand, and governance, institutions, and discourse, on the other; the methodological problems and the models emerging in this new field of research; and an assessment of the results arising out of theoretical and empirical research. One theme throughout the article is that, in order to develop a progressive agenda, Europeanisation should be seen as a problem, not as a solution. It is neither a new theory, nor an ad-hoc approach. Rather, it is a way of orchestrating existing concepts and to contribute to cumulative research in political science. Europeanisation does not provide any simple fix to theoretical or empirical problems. Quite the opposite, it can deliver if approached as a set of puzzles. A problem in search of explanation – not the explanation itself (Gualini 2003). The conclusion is that Europeanisation has contributed to the emergence of new insights, original explanations, and interesting questions on three important issues: the understanding and analysis of ‘impact’, how to endogeneise international governance in models of domestic politics, and the relationship between agency and change. These three issues are prominent in the research agendas of international relations, theoretical policy analysis, and comparative politics. To contribute to major issues at the core of political science is a valuable result for a relatively new field of inquiry.
Is ‘Europeanization’ as disappointing a term as it is fashionable? Should it be abandoned, or is it useful for understanding European transformations? Five uses are discussed and it is argued that research need not be hampered by competing definitions as long as their meaning, the phenomena in focus, the simplifying assumption used, the models of change and the theoretical challenges involved, are clarified and kept separate. The research challenge is one of model building, not one of inventing definitions. While it is premature to abandon the term, its usefulness may be more limited than its widespread use could indicate. Europeanization may be less useful as an explanatory concept than as an attention–directing device and a starting point for further exploration.
This text looks at the political aspects of European integration from the point of view of domestic politics. In doing so, it goes beyond the classic analysis of “how policies are made in Brussels” and raises instead the question “what is the power of Europe in national contexts”? The questions at the heart of this volume are crucial both for our understanding of European integration and for their policy implications. What does Europeanization really mean? How can it be measured? How is the European Union affecting domestic politics and policies in member states and candidate countries? Is Europeanization an irreversible process? Does it mean convergence across Europe? How and why do differences remain? The contributors explain and question the “power of Europe” by providing theoretical and empirical perspectives on domestic politics and institutions, government and administration, public policies, political actors and business groups. The volume contains a research agenda for the nascent literature on Europeanization.
We argue in this paper in favor of a rather parsimonious theoretical approach to the study of the domestic impact of Europeanization. Whether we study policies, politics, or polities, a misfit between European-level and domestic processes, policies, or institutions constitutes the necessary condition for expecting any change. However, adaptational pressures alone are insufficient. There must be mediating factors enabling or prohibiting domestic change and accounting for the empirically observable differential impact of Europe. We have then introduced two pathways leading to domestic changes which are theoretically grounded in rationalist and sociological institutionalisms, respectively. On the one hand, rationalist institutionalism follows a logic of resource redistribution emphasizing the absence of multiple veto points and the presence of supporting institutions as the main factors facilitating change. On the other hand, sociological institutionalism exhibits a sociali-zation and learning account focussing on norm entrepreneurs as “change agents” and the presence of a cooperative political culture as the main mediating factors. We claim that Europeanization might lead to convergence in policy outcomes, but at best to “clustered convergence” and continuing divergence with regard to policy processes and instruments, politics, and polities.
This paper discusses the concept of Europeanization in the light of recent research on the impact of the European Union politics and policy. Conceptual analysis is preliminary to empirical analysis. Accordingly, I examine the risk of “concept stretching”, discuss extension and intension of Europeanization, and propose a taxonomy to “unpack” the concept and organize empirical research. The explanation of Europeanization is based on mechanisms and variables that need further exploration, but some preliminary results are presented here. Further research should concentrate on the policy level (and its interaction with macro-structures) and seek cross-fertilization with theoretical policy analysis and international relations, thus avoiding the risk of intellectual segregation.