Toward an analysis of the contemporary Western European radical left -- The Western European landscape, 1914-1988 -- The Western European landscape, 1989-2015 -- The German radical left : a success story -- The Italian radical left : the story of a failure -- The French radical left : success or failure? -- Filling the vacuum? : The trajectory of the contemporary radical left in Western Europe
AbstractThe article provides an innovative, comprehensive quantitative analysis of legal integration and differentiation in the European Union (EU) from 1958 to 2020. Building on a streamlined analytical framework and new or revised datasets on EU primary, EU secondary and EU‐related international law, it challenges or qualifies several aspects of the received wisdom on European integration. Specifically, it delivers the first‐ever quantitative estimate of integration in terms of integration opportunities, shows that differentiation is deployed in a reluctant and eclectic manner and offers clear measurements for the prevalence of various modes of temporal, spatial and policy differentiation. These methodological and empirical findings confirm the fruitfulness of the quantitative approach to the study of European integration and point to promising avenues for future research on international integration and comparative regionalism.
Despite a considerable scholarly interest in differentiated integration (DI) as a design option, the literature on the topic is fragmented and unsystematic. The present paper fills this gap by developing a novel analytical framework to inform the assessment and design of international integration schemes based on seven evaluative criteria (feasibility, overall benefits, substantive fairness, procedural fairness, acceptance, sustainability, and overall desirability) and related design principles (maximization or satisfaction) and empirical indicators. It then applies it to the available theoretical and empirical literature on various models of international integration to identify the comparative strengths and weaknesses of internal DI and external DI. In light of the predominantly normative and highly controversial nature of the assessment process, the analysis suggests that the best way to design efficient and legitimate DI schemes is to ensure their responsiveness to democratic preferences and decision-making procedures at the national or EU level. ; This publication is part of the InDivEU project which has received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement number 822304. The content of this document represents only the views of the InDivEU consortium and is its sole responsibility. The European Commission does not accept any responsibility for use that may be made of the information it contains.
An appropriate quantitative measurement of party strength is an essential precondition to any further qualitative assessment of partisan influence. The existing literature offers a number of individual indicators but fails to integrate them into a coherent systematic framework. This article fills that gap by proposing a new multi-dimensional and multi-level framework model to operationalise and measure party strength. The soundness of the approach is tested on the case of the evolution of German parties between 1991 and 2013.
"Starting from the 1980s, competitive pressures and the ideology of competitiveness have shaken and transformed traditional models of development, public policy, and governance in Europe. This edited book carries out a comprehensive, interdisciplinary, and innovative analysis of the relationship between competitiveness and solidarity in the contemporary European Union. It offers an original contribution to the scholarly debates on the current developments and challenges of welfare states, social and economic policies, and forms of governance in the European Union. Bringing together an international team of cutting-edge scholars in social sciences and humanities, this book sheds light on the conceptual richness and policy relevance of these relationships, pointing to important avenues to make the European Union more economically successful and socially fairer. This book will be of key interest to scholars and students of European Union studies and, more broadly, of EU Law, Public Policy, Economics, Sociology, Political Science, Geography, and Contemporary History"--
Abstract On the one hand, Brexit has repatriated key competences from the EU to the UK, broadening the scope for political decisions which respond to national democratic preferences. On the other hand, it has highlighted traditional weaknesses of the British democracy, further concentrating powers in the hands of the British government and strengthening the role of the Prime Minister as the head of an "elective dictatorship" subject to few checks and balances. We explore these developments in light of constitutional law, political expert opinions, and mass surveys, showing that British democracy remains strong but is challenged by heightened popular expectations and widespread demands for reform.
Startingin the 1980s, competitive pressures and the ideology of competitiveness have shaken and transformed traditional models of development, public policy, and governance in Europe. This edited book carries out a comprehensive, interdisciplinary, and innovative analysis of the relationship between competitiveness and solidarity in the contemporary European Union. It offers an original contribution to the scholarly debates on the current developments and challenges of welfare states, social and economic policies, and forms of governance in the European Union. Bringing together an international team of cutting-edge scholars in the social sciences and thehumanities, Competitiveness and Solidarity in the European Union sheds light on the conceptual richness and policy relevance of these relationships, pointing to important avenues to make the European Union more economically successful and socially fairer. This book will be of key interest to scholars and students of European Union studies and, more broadly, of EU Law, Public Policy, Economics, Sociology, Political Science, Geography, and Contemporary History.
