Search results

This article suggests that the literature on how the European Union (EU) diffuses its norms externally and that on how it diffuses them internally should be linked. Therefore, the focus is on a field where the EU is described as a 'normative' power: climate change. The article analyzes how EU climate norms are diffused to new Member States. It argues that there are two roads to state socialization: through civil servants participating in EU work, and via domestic norm entrepreneurs. The empirical analysis is based on how four of the Member States that joined the EU in 2004-07 worked with the Climate and Energy Package of 2008-09. With the exception of one of the countries, there are few indications of an ongoing socialization process among them. For the EU as a normative power it is important to reflect upon why the underlying EU climate norms are rejected in the studied countries. Adapted from the source document.

AbstractThis article suggests that the literature on how the European Union (EU) diffuses its norms externally and that on how it diffuses them internally should be linked. Therefore, the focus is on a field where the EU is described as a 'normative' power: climate change. The article analyzes how EU climate norms are diffused to new Member States. It argues that there are two roads to state socialization: through civil servants participating in EU work, and via domestic norm entrepreneurs. The empirical analysis is based on how four of the Member States that joined the EU in 2004–07 worked with the Climate and Energy Package of 2008–09. With the exception of one of the countries, there are few indications of an ongoing socialization process among them. For the EU as a normative power it is important to reflect upon why the underlying EU climate norms are rejected in the studied countries.

There is a significant amount of scholarly literature produced on the topic of the alleged legitimacy deficit of the European Union (EU). This article is based on the assumption that the legitimacy of the EU is shaped largely by the domestic discourses on European governance. Therefore the stories of the individual countries are crucial for our understanding of EU legitimacy as a whole. The article is an analysis of how the legitimacy of the EU is constructed and shaped in the Czech and Swedish political discourses. It is based on discourse analysis and the constant comparative method of grounded theory, and suggests that the discourses on European unity in the two countries are structured around the nexus of modernization and sovereignty. Based on different constellations of this nexus, three ideal types are outlined: sovereignty unchallenged, sovereignty challenged and modernization unchallenged. In conclusion, it is suggested that the EU has been legitimized primarily as an instrument for modernization. Critics, however, base their argumentation on an underlying discourse on the sovereign people and on an understanding of the EU as a hindrance to progress. The advocates thus emphasize output-oriented legitimacy, while the critics are more concerned with input-based legitimacy.