Comparative European Politics

This book provides a broad and accessible introduction to contemporary European politics, covering the fundamental elements of European democracies, institutions, and practices of government. It provides comprehensive coverage of the twenty-seven member states of the European Union, additionally drawing on examples from the UK, Switzerland, Norway, Iceland, Serbia, and Bosnia-Herzegovina. The book is divided into three parts. Part 1 focuses on democratic representation, examining the core features of electoral democracy in Europe. Part 2 turns to the institutions and practices of government, focusing in particular on how institutional design shapes political outcomes. Part 3 examines a number of contemporary issues and challenges, including migration, economic crises, the threat of international terrorism, and the rise of anti-establishment parties, and examines the effects they have had on politics in European countries. Throughout, up-to-date examples on issues such as Brexit, the coronavirus pandemic, and growing instability in Europe are used to help students understand the real-world context of European politics.

2006 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 197-208 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Hemery ◽  
Paul Meerts

AbstractThis article draws on the experience of two series of courses in negotiation and chairing, fifty in all, conducted in preparation for the UK and Finnish Presidencies of the European Union, 2005 and 2006. It outlines the concept and design of the programme, and introduces a four-part analysis of the chair's role which provided the intellectual framework for the series. It examines in detail the structure of the courses and the practical exercises which formed the core of the training. A concluding section draws together the lessons learned. The article would be helpful specifically to those preparing officials for the Presidency of the EU, but also for multilateral negotiations more generally, as well as to those interested in the theory and practice of chairing.


Author(s):  
Leonardo Morlino ◽  
Daniela Piana ◽  
Cecilia E. Sottilotta

When checking the influence of European Union empirically, as for inequalities, first, the amount of resources which are devoted to cohesion policy is still negligible. Second, looking at the effects of the crisis and the impact of austerity measures, compounded by significant reforms of the EMU institutional architecture, the six countries under examination were affected to different degrees. Germany was mostly immune to the crisis, and Poland even experienced sustained growth during the crisis years. As a non-member of the Eurozone, the UK was affected by the crisis but retained its monetary sovereignty, and its commitment to austerity with a decline in social protection, healthcare and education cannot be directly traced to EU-level commitments. France avoided a significant overhaul of its welfare system, while Spain and Italy experienced a contraction, especially in the sectors of healthcare and education. As for freedoms, in the case of the possible ‘trade-off’ between the need to guarantee security in the face of domestic and international terrorism and citizens’ right to privacy, the middle ground established by the current EU ‘Privacy Shield’ paradigm leaves several problems unsolved. Moreover, it is essential to mention that the mechanism put in place by Article 7 of the Treaty on the European Union to sanction possible violations of those values and principles, has not been sufficient to stop the current democratic backslides in some member states, notably Poland and Hungary. To sum up, the new scenario seems to depict a more nuanced predominance of the transnational provisions in terms of European freedoms and a reshaping of the domestic-European balance.


Author(s):  
N. Y. Kaveshnikov

The article discusses some implications of the Brexit referendum for institutional and political development of the European Union and for relations between the EU and the UK. The most obvious consequence of the referendum is the collapse of ideology of continuous and progressing development of integration. Instead of endless, irreversible, a priori beneficial for everyone integration process, the European Union has become an organization that does not have a Messianic goal and obliged to prove its usefulness in everyday life. EU systemic crisis will inevitably lead to a profound transformation of its institutional and political structure. After the British referendum, only two options are possible. First of all, partial deconstruction of the European Union. The idea that European integration has gone too far lies in the basis of this strategy. According to this logic, the single market is the main EU achievement. Return to the basics - this is a pragmatic approach to integration, which should replace attempts to fix rotten projects (like Euro) or to achieve the unattainable (political Union). This option is hardly probable. Second option is transformation of the EU into the "core and periphery" system having the basis flexible integration. Over the past 20 years, flexibility transformed from temporary phenomenon into a permanent and formalized mechanism; its elements exist in many EU politics. Brexit would be able to accelerate significantly the formation of a cohesive core within the Eu. The core will not be homogeneous; it will include as governing structures: the German-French axis and a group of EU founding countries.


Author(s):  
Robert E. Goodin ◽  
Kai Spiekermann

This chapter reflects on the election of Donald Trump and the vote of the British electorate in favour of ‘Brexit’ from the European Union. While we refrain from judging the outcomes of these votes, we do discuss concerns pertaining to the lack of truthfulness in both campaigns. After rehearsing the lies on which the Trump and Brexit campaigns were based, we consider different explanations as to why these campaigns were nevertheless successful, and where this leaves the argument for epistemic democracy. Particularly worrisome are tendencies towards ‘epistemic insouciance’, ‘epistemic malevolence’, and ‘epistemic agnosticism’. We also consider the problematic influence of social media in terms of echo chambers and filter bubbles. The core argument in favour of epistemic democracy is that the pooling of votes by majority rule has epistemically beneficial properties, assuming certain conditions. If these assumptions are not met, or are systematically corrupted, then epistemic democracy is under threat.


This book provides the first comprehensive analysis of the withdrawal agreement concluded between the United Kingdom and the European Union to create the legal framework for Brexit. Building on a prior volume, it overviews the process of Brexit negotiations that took place between the UK and the EU from 2017 to 2019. It also examines the key provisions of the Brexit deal, including the protection of citizens’ rights, the Irish border, and the financial settlement. Moreover, the book assesses the governance provisions on transition, decision-making and adjudication, and the prospects for future EU–UK trade relations. Finally, it reflects on the longer-term challenges that the implementation of the 2016 Brexit referendum poses for the UK territorial system, for British–Irish relations, as well as for the future of the EU beyond Brexit.


2021 ◽  
Vol 58 (2) ◽  
pp. 133-149
Author(s):  
Emmanuel Brunet-Jailly

This special issue of International Studies focuses on ‘how the British-exit is impacting the European Union’. This introduction is a review of the context, costs and institutional repercussions, as well as the very recent the UK/European Union trade deal and implications for customs borders. Eight articles then detail consequences for European Union policies and important trading relationships: Immigration, Citizenship, Gender, Northern Ireland, Trade and impacts on India, Canada and Japan.


2002 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-24 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrick Ring ◽  
Roddy McKinnon

Across the European Union, national governments are re-assessing the institutional mechanisms through which pension provision is delivered. This articles sets the debate within the wider context of the ‘pillared’ structural analysis often adopted by international institutions when discussing pensions reform. It then sets out a detailed discussion of developments in the UK, arguing that the UK is moving towards a model of reform akin to that promoted by the World Bank – referred to here as ‘pillared-privatisation’. The themes of this model indicate more means-testing, greater private provision, and a shift of the burden of risk from the government to individuals. An assessment is then made of the implications of UK developments for other EU countries. It is suggested that while there are strong reasons to think that other countries will not travel as far down the road of ‘pillared-privatisation’ as the UK, this should not be taken as a ‘given’.


2004 ◽  
Vol 06 (02) ◽  
pp. 177-188 ◽  
Author(s):  
JOE WESTON

Directive 97/11/EC, amending the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Directive (85/337/EEC), introduced a number of key changes to the procedures of EIA in the European Union (EU). One significant amendment was the introduction of a requirement for EIAs to be completed for "changes or extensions to Annex I or II projects that have already been authorised executed or are in the process of being executed and which are likely to have significant adverse effects on the environment (CEC, 1997). That requirement imposes a duty on competent authorities to screen all changes and extensions of Annex I and Annex II projects for the need for EIA. Applying legal and policy principles established in the European Union, the scope of what constitute relevant changes and extensions is very wide. Given this wide scope, it would be reasonable to assume that screening changes or extensions would have been a major growth area of EIA activity in the UK. However, evidence presented here indicates just the opposite and suggests that many local planning authorities are not fully aware of the full implications of this clause in the EIA Directive. Furthermore, for the full implications of the "changes and extensions" clause to be implemented in the UK may require further amendments to the EIA legislation.


2004 ◽  
Vol 37 (4) ◽  
pp. 509-522 ◽  
Author(s):  
Victor D. Bojkov

The article analyses the process of EU enlargement with reference to the progress that Bulgaria and Romania have made within it. It is argued that leaving them out of the wave of accession finalised in May 2004 for ten of the candidate states, has placed them in a situation of double exclusion. Firstly, their geographical belonging to the region of Southeast Europe has been rendered non-essential by their advanced position within the EU enlargement process. Secondly, their achievement in economic and political transition has been removed from the progress of the ten states, which joined the EU in May 2004 by delaying the time of their accession. As a result, any efforts in regional cooperation and integration between Bulgaria and Romania on one hand, and other Southeast European states on the other, have been effectively cancelled. Moreover, in current European politics, the two countries have come to serve the unenviable role of exemplifying on the part of the European Union how progress is being awarded and hesitation punished.


2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 63-75 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tanase Tasente

The Brexit referendum was among the first major public events where online users had no "slacktivism" reactions and they led the entire debate and popular will from the inside of the online world to the real world. It is becoming increasingly clear that Social Media is becoming an increasingly powerful tool in political debates, and during the parliamentary, presidential, European parliamentary or even referendum elections, it becomes the channel that can decide the final outcome. However, the debate in the online environment can be altered by two important factors: (1) political bots - which can manipulate public opinion by posting in a large number of fake news and (2) "slacktivism" reactions from online users. , who are content only to quickly distribute unverified information or to push impulse driven on the "like" button and to scroll further. This study focused on analyzing the frequency with which European institutions spoke about Brexit on their Facebook pages and on identifying and analyzing the messages that generate high engagement from users. Thus, we will analyze all the posts published by the three major European institutions - the European Commission, the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union - starting on the first day after the Brexit Referendum in the UK (24 June 2016) until 24 June 2019.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document