Search results

Liberal intergovernmentalism approach proposed by Andrew Moravcsik is an important contribution to regional integration studies in Western Europe. Can it also help explaining integration among developing countries? The objective of this paper is to examine the extent to which liberal intergovernmentalism can be used to explain the process of integration in the Caribbean Basin, in particular, the Assoc of Caribbean States (ACS). Firstly, this paper evaluated Moravcsik's approach to regional integration & its contribution to integration theory. Secondly, the development of the ACS is analyzed by using a variable of the Moravcsik approach: the process of formation of national preferences. Based on the study of the formation of national preferences in Costa Rica, the Dominican Republic, & Mexico, the paper shows the extent to which Moravcsik ideas could account for regionalism in the Caribbean Basin. Adapted from the source document.

UK action with respect to the Constitutional Treaty is instructive & paradoxical. Regarding the former, the way in which its preferences were formulated challenge the contentions of liberal intergovernmentalism, the main theoretical approach in the field. With respect to the latter, New Labour adopted a positive & constructive approach that distinguished its conduct from that of previous governments, but its failure to engage domestic public opinion undermined its achievement of a 'British Constitution' and, though saved from holding the referendum that it had promised, the government succeeded only in alienating its European partners abroad & allowing Europsceptics to win the debate by default at home. Adapted from the source document.

My secret hope, before starting reading this book, was to discover some new avenues for reflection that would help to renew the theoretical debate on the European Union (EU). Unfortunately, however, Moravcsik's familiar reader will find only a summary in which the author develops the thesis he has developed over the past decade under the banner of 'liberal intergovernmentalism' (.). ; Mon secret espoir, avant d'entamer la lecture de ce livre, était d'y découvrir quelques nouvelles pistes de réflexion contribuant à renouveler le débat théorique sur l'Union européenne (UE). Mais hélas, le lecteur déjà familier de Moravcsik n'y trouvera qu'une synthèse dans laquelle l'auteur développe les thèses qu'il a élaborées depuis une dizaine d'années sous la bannière de l' "intergouvernementalisme libéral " (.).

Créé par une convention en 1995, Europol a connu en une vingtaine d'années des mutations organisationnelles et opérationnelles majeures, sans pour autant pouvoir être pensé comme une police européenne supranationale. Dès lors, la gouvernance sui generis de cette agence européenne, accordant une place centrale aux gouvernements nationaux, et la limitation de ses pouvoirs semblent a priori se conformer à l'idée d'un paradoxe de l'intégration, mis en lumière par les travaux du new intergovernmentalism . En étudiant les évolutions d'Europol par le biais des approches de sociologie de l'action publique, cet article propose de nuancer, voire de remettre en cause certains des postulats néo-intergouvernementalistes. Pour ce faire, cet article souligne la pluralité des acteurs, de leurs représentations et de leurs interactions dans le processus décisionnel européen, sous-estimée par ces travaux visant à théoriser l'intégration européenne.

Réalisée en 4 ans, rédigée en 2007-2008. ; This dissertation deals with the construction, practices and legitimating uses of the European Security and Defence Policy since the 1990's. First we study the genesis of the European defence policy taking into account short-term factors opening a policy window (the end of the Cold War, the Balkan conflicts, NATO's reform) as well as structural factors, in this case the socializing framework of the French-German military cooperation. We demonstrate the political entrepreneurship of Mitterrand and Kohl seizing this policy window. They were later taken over by the diplomatic services of the EU states. Secondly we analyze the construction of the European defence policy as a specific social figuration within the EU framework. This new social figuration, relying on proper organs and on intergovernmentalism, interplays with the national defence figurations structured in time, modifying the interdependence games between the capitals and Brussels, and between the main actors groups (in this case officers, diplomats and defence civil servants). Moreover this ESDP figuration is deeply affected and modelled by the weight of the socialization of theses actors on a threefold level: national, professional and institutional. These several socialization weigh on the way theses actors daily practice and conceive the European defence policy .Indeed this new social space is invested on different ways by each categories of actors (military and diplomatic/civilian). Last but not least, the national security cultures are still very pregnant and go on framing ESDP in different ways according to the security representations of each state. This raises legitimating questions for this policy. Eventually European Security and Defence Policy does not aim at building a Euro-army, but fulfils latent functions as a political and symbolic substitute for European security action in the world. These latent functions appear to be at least as important as, if not more than, its manifest functions of ...

Réalisée en 4 ans, rédigée en 2007-2008. ; This dissertation deals with the construction, practices and legitimating uses of the European Security and Defence Policy since the 1990's. First we study the genesis of the European defence policy taking into account short-term factors opening a policy window (the end of the Cold War, the Balkan conflicts, NATO's reform) as well as structural factors, in this case the socializing framework of the French-German military cooperation. We demonstrate the political entrepreneurship of Mitterrand and Kohl seizing this policy window. They were later taken over by the diplomatic services of the EU states. Secondly we analyze the construction of the European defence policy as a specific social figuration within the EU framework. This new social figuration, relying on proper organs and on intergovernmentalism, interplays with the national defence figurations structured in time, modifying the interdependence games between the capitals and Brussels, and between the main actors groups (in this case officers, diplomats and defence civil servants). Moreover this ESDP figuration is deeply affected and modelled by the weight of the socialization of theses actors on a threefold level: national, professional and institutional. These several socialization weigh on the way theses actors daily practice and conceive the European defence policy .Indeed this new social space is invested on different ways by each categories of actors (military and diplomatic/civilian). Last but not least, the national security cultures are still very pregnant and go on framing ESDP in different ways according to the security representations of each state. This raises legitimating questions for this policy. Eventually European Security and Defence Policy does not aim at building a Euro-army, but fulfils latent functions as a political and symbolic substitute for European security action in the world. These latent functions appear to be at least as important as, if not more than, its manifest functions of ...

Réalisée en 4 ans, rédigée en 2007-2008. ; This dissertation deals with the construction, practices and legitimating uses of the European Security and Defence Policy since the 1990's. First we study the genesis of the European defence policy taking into account short-term factors opening a policy window (the end of the Cold War, the Balkan conflicts, NATO's reform) as well as structural factors, in this case the socializing framework of the French-German military cooperation. We demonstrate the political entrepreneurship of Mitterrand and Kohl seizing this policy window. They were later taken over by the diplomatic services of the EU states. Secondly we analyze the construction of the European defence policy as a specific social figuration within the EU framework. This new social figuration, relying on proper organs and on intergovernmentalism, interplays with the national defence figurations structured in time, modifying the interdependence games between the capitals and Brussels, and between the main actors groups (in this case officers, diplomats and defence civil servants). Moreover this ESDP figuration is deeply affected and modelled by the weight of the socialization of theses actors on a threefold level: national, professional and institutional. These several socialization weigh on the way theses actors daily practice and conceive the European defence policy .Indeed this new social space is invested on different ways by each categories of actors (military and diplomatic/civilian). Last but not least, the national security cultures are still very pregnant and go on framing ESDP in different ways according to the security representations of each state. This raises legitimating questions for this policy. Eventually European Security and Defence Policy does not aim at building a Euro-army, but fulfils latent functions as a political and symbolic substitute for European security action in the world. These latent functions appear to be at least as important as, if not more than, its manifest functions of ...

This dissertation examines efforts to integrate a "new" policy sector – forest and forestry – into the European Union (EU). There is currently no legal foundation for a common forest policy and some member states (not least Sweden), as well as parts of the forestry sector, have been strongly opposed to one. At the same time, administrative units and structures within the EU have been created and they and some member states have promoted a common policy. This raises the question how can we understand and explain this? The purpose of this dissertation is to problematise, map and analyse mainly Swedish actors' attitudes to efforts to create a common forest policy within the EU. The study is based on neofunctionalism, which is a classic theory of integration, but it uses newer theorising (from intergovernmentalism and modern versions of neofunctionalism) to address some of the weaknesses of the approach. I investigate the role, preferences and strategies of the main actors. This includes EU institutions and member states. I also map European industry interests and other associations, interest groups and active networks and study their role in the process. In these multi-national settings, I pay particular (although not exclusive) attention to their Swedish members. Within Sweden, I examine how governmental and non-governmental forest actors behave vis-à-vis the EU. The empirical investigation shows that some of Swedish actors, for example the private forest owners' organisation and forest industries associations, have change their preferences and strate gies over time. They have come to believe that whether they like it or not, other policy areas affect forest and forestry both directly and indirectly. Because of this, they now take the position that it is better to promote a limited European forest policy rather than remaining aloof and risk the creation of a much more comprehensive and centralised policy. At the same time (and for now at least), the Swedish government and most party politicians remain opposed to any attempt to formalise a forest policy within the EU. This study contributes new knowledge about how new policy areas become integrated within EU, including knowledge about the roles that different actors can have in such processes. The results are of interest to researchers, decision makers and the interested public. They can also influence thinking about Sweden's influence in, and relation to, EU forest policy. Based on the empirical results, my theoretical conclusion is that organised interests have an important role in the integration process. The integration process of forest and forestry is not driven by one actor, but by many different actors, who operate on different levels and who have different interests. This study shows that forest and forestry-related questions have come to the EU, and they will remain there. The important question for the future is not if there will be some kind of European level policy on forest and forestry, but rather what form European policy will take.