The National Co-ordination of EU Policy: The Domestic Level. Edited by Hussein Kassim, B. Guy Peters, and Vincent Wright. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000. 269p. $72.00.

2002 ◽  
Vol 96 (3) ◽  
pp. 691-692
Author(s):  
Maria Green Cowles

In recent years, scholars of the European Union (EU) have looked increasingly at the impact—administrative, institutional, legal, societal—of European integration on the member states. Some of this earlier literature on “Europeanization” viewed the Brussels–member state relationship in a rather static, one-way, top-down dimension. For this reason, the editors of The National Co-ordination of EU Policy take pains to eschew Europeanization as an organizing concept. But perhaps the editors doth protest too much. The National Co-ordination of EU Policy, in fact, fits nicely in the current literature on Europeanization, which views the Brussels–member state relationship in more dynamic terms. Indeed, the book provides a welcome and valuable addition by examining the domestic coordination processes through which “governments arrive at the position that they defend in EU decision making” (p. 235).

2021 ◽  
Vol 120 (824) ◽  
pp. 112-117
Author(s):  
Alexander Clarkson

European integration based on a supranational form of pooled sovereignty has taken on increasingly state-like qualities. With every move toward absorbing additional members, the European Union system has expanded its geographic reach. The state-like power of the EU is apparent in the impact its integration processes have had in societies just outside its borders. Its growing influence is most notable in misfit border territories, from Kaliningrad to Transnistria, and from Cyprus to Northern Ireland, that are tenuously under the political control of neighboring geopolitical powers.


Author(s):  
Mark A. Pollack ◽  
Christilla Roederer-Rynning ◽  
Alasdair R. Young

The European Union represents a remarkable, ongoing experiment in the collective governance of a multinational continent of nearly 450 million citizens and 27 member states. The key aim of this volume is to understand the processes that produce EU policies: that is, the decisions (or non-decisions) by EU public authorities facing choices between alternative courses of public action. We do not advance any single theory of EU policy-making, although we do draw extensively on theories of European integration, international cooperation, comparative politics, and contemporary governance; and we identify five ‘policy modes’ operating across the 15 case study chapters in the volume. This chapter introduces the volume by summarizing our collective approach to understanding policy-making in the EU, identifying the significant developments that have impacted EU policy-making since the seventh edition of this volume, and previewing the case studies and their central findings.


2020 ◽  
pp. 205-239
Author(s):  
Sylvia de Mars

This chapter addresses the Treaty's provisions on the enforcement of EU law, particularly looking at Articles 258–260 TFEU (Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union). The European Commission's enforcement action, known as ‘infringement proceedings’, is set out in Article 258 TFEU. If the Commission proves an infringement has occurred, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) will issue a binding verdict that requires the Member State to rectify the breach: in other words, to amend its domestic laws until they are compliant with EU law. Article 260 TFEU makes clear, however, that the CJEU can only order ‘compliance’. Article 259 sets out a very similar process, rarely used, for Member State v Member State infringement proceedings. The chapter then considers the CJEU's development of the principles of direct and indirect effect and state liability, and explores the remedies for breaches of EU law. It also assesses the impact of Brexit on the enforcement of EU law.


2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 152-172 ◽  
Author(s):  
Narisong Huhe ◽  
Daniel Naurin ◽  
Robert Thomson

We assess the impact of the United Kingdom’s 2016 decision to leave the European Union on the Council of the European Union, where Brexit is likely to have the clearest observable implications. Using concepts and models from the spatial model of politics and network analysis, we formulate and test expectations regarding the effects of Brexit. We examine two of the most prominent datasets on recent decision-making in the European Union, which include data on cooperation networks among member states before and after the 2016 referendum. Our findings identify some of the political challenges that Brexit will bring, but also highlight the factors that are already helping the European Union’s remaining member states to adapt to Brexit.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Bernadette Sangmeister

<p>On 14 January 2014, for the first time in its history, the German Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) decided to refer a decision to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). This referral, which concerned the issue of the legality of the European Central Bank’s bond-buying practices, must be seen as “historic” with regard to European integration and the relationship between European Union law and German constitutional law, forming part of important decisions of the FCC in this field since its first euro-critical judgment, Solange I, 40 years ago. Considering the high influence the German Federal Constitutional Court has had on the process of European integration, this paper aims at identifying and critiquing the lines of argumentation developed by the FCC in recent years in the field of European integration and decision-making before and after the Lisbon judgment in 2009, paying particular attention to the currently suspended OMT Decision proceedings in order to answer the question if a shift in the jurisprudence of the FCC from a euro-sceptical to a euro-phile approach has taken place.</p>


Author(s):  
Bogdan Ilut

<p>In the last decade the European integration process was the main focuses of the European Union, as its completion could bring a huge step toward a fully integrated European Union. As the banking sector is the main channel for funding of the European economy, it has become now more clearly than ever that is integration is of the up more essence. The aim of this paper is to quantify the progresses registered by the main European Union’s economies in the process of banking integration, as their example is generally followed by the other member states. First we underline the necessity of the European integration and the progress made using an extended literature review doublet by an analysis of the main indicators for the banking systems of these countries. We also present, in a non-exhaustive way, the main trends that have characterised the banking sectors of these countries in the last decade: diversification, vertical product differential and consolidation underlying their impact on the sectors architecture.</p>


2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ringa Raudla ◽  
Aleksandrs Cepilovs ◽  
Rainer Kattel ◽  
Linda Sutt

Abstract Our paper explores how a rule prescribed by the European Union can bring about changes in the policy discourse of a member state. Drawing on the literatures of discursive institutionalism and Europeanization, the theoretical part discusses the factors that influence discursive shifts. The empirical part examines the discursive impacts of the introduction of the structural budget deficit rule, required by the Fiscal Compact, in Estonia and Latvia. It demonstrates how the discursive shifts have been shaped by the localized translations offered by civil servants, the entrance of additional actors to the policy-making arena, crisis experience, and the strategic interests of policy actors.


2018 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 181-191
Author(s):  
Christopher Walsch

Abstract This article explores whether a new east‑west divide exists in the enlarged European Union by analysing national discourses on European integration in the Visegrad Four (V4) states. Two V4 foreign policy legacies form the basis of analysis: the “Return to Europe” discourse and the discourses around the reconstruction of the historical self. The article gives evidence that the V4 countries share sovereignty in external policies and thus have a distinct European orientation. V4 national‑conservative governments hold sovereigntist positions, however, in policy areas that they consider falling exclusively within the realm of the member state. Comparison with Western European member states gives evidence that the post-1945 paradigm changes were more profound than those of post-1989 ones of Eastern Europe. This historic legacy can explain the more integrationist orientations in Western Europe. The article concludes that behaviour of the individual V4 state seems to be of greater importance for each member than collective V4 group action. Finally, the article gives an outlook on ways in which solidarity between the Western and Eastern halves of the EU can be exercised in an ideologically diverging Union.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document