This handbook is currently in development, with individual articles publishing online in advance of print publication. At this time, we cannot add information about unpublished articles in this handbook, however the table of contents will continue to grow as additional articles pass through the review process and are added to the site. Please note that the online publication date for this handbook is the date that the first article in the title was published online.
Zugriffsoptionen:
Die folgenden Links führen aus den jeweiligen lokalen Bibliotheken zum Volltext:
This article reviews the by now extensive literature on the Europeanisation of the political systems of the EU-15, with an emphasis on parliaments and executives (i.e., governments and ministerial administrations). The Living Review highlights apparently contradictory effects of integration: de-parlamentarisation vs. re-parlamentarisation; bureaucratisation vs. politicisation; and centralisation vs. diffusion. These diverging assessments of the effects of integration do, in part, reflect diversity in the EU-15; in part, they are, however, also a result of differences in the specification of variables, research designs and theoretical approaches. Work that inquires into patterns of Europeanisation across institutional domains, countries, regions and time and which seeks to tackle the 'methodological nationalism' of the Europeanisation literature promises a clearer picture of the institutional consequences of European integration than we possess at present.
Les principales études récentes portant sur la Commission européenne indiquent que la politisation et la centralisation grandissantes sont des tendances importantes qui transforment son organisation. Dans le présent article, nous analysons le rôle qu'ont joué dans cette évolution les règles et les pratiques temporelles qui structurent le fonctionnement de la Commission. Dans notre article, nous observons un message temporel bien présent en filigrane en ce qui concerne la politisation et la centralisation. Ce message s'observe lorsque l'on examine deux relations essentielles sensibles au facteur temps : entre le niveau politique (le Collège des commissaires) et le niveau administratif, et entre les unités de coordination centrale (notamment le secrétariat général) et les unités fonctionnelles. Le réglage de l'heure politique, le suivi et l'exécution ont gagné en importance, réduisant la latitude temporelle de l'administration, les « gardiens du temps » au niveau central ont acquis des compétences plus larges, et les avantages bureaucratiques traditionnels dans les budgets temps et les horizons temporels se sont réduits.
Major recent studies of the European Commission have emphasised the growing politicisation and centralisation as important trends transforming its organisation. The present article analyses the role that time rules and temporal practices that structure the operation of the Commission have played in these trends. It finds a clear temporal subtext to politicisation and centralisation. This becomes evident when one examines two key time-sensitive relationships: between the political level – the College of Commissioners – and the administrative level; and between central coordination units – notably the Secretariat-General – and line units. Political time-setting, monitoring and enforcement have assumed greater prominence, reducing the temporal discretion of the administration; central 'keepers of the clock' have acquired greater power; and traditional bureaucratic advantages in time budgets and time horizons have diminished.
During the 1970s, analyses of state and government in Western Europe were preoccupied with crises of governability and legitimacy. The early 1980s witnessed sharply differing responses to these crises, exemplified by the socialist experiment in France and Thatcherism in the UK. By the end of the 1980s, 'governance'- in both national and European arenas-began to be regarded as the dominant institutional response to problems of governability. Considered from the perspective of comparative European government, the oft-claimed shift from government to governance appears overstated. Governance is less widespread and consequential both at national and European levels than its proponents suggest, as a survey of the propellants, conditions and national and European constellations of governance shows. Viewed historically, governance does not so much indicate a shift from government as towards government, as the core institutions of the state build up capacity to deal authoritatively and hierarchically with new governing challenges. Adapted from the source document.
