Search results

A comparative examination of the German & Austrian presidencies of the European Union (EU) focuses on the ability of national governments to affect the EU's policy agenda & to promote national goals. The Austrian presidency in 1998 was the first time a new member presided, while the German presidency in 1999 represented leadership by a founding member. The literature on EU policy making is reviewed. The comparison considers German & Austrian preparations, agendas, & the conformity between agendas & outcomes. It is argued that the usual Commission-Council struggle was not a significant factor during either presidency, largely due to the impact of other domestic & international events, including the influence of the German elections on Austria's presidency, & the Kosovo conflict/NATO strikes against Serbia on the German presidency. It is concluded that Council presidencies are largely path dependent & national governments have considerable opportunities to shape the EU agenda. However, European Councils are often hijacked by outside events that can either increase or decrease cooperation in Europe. J. Lindroth

The revival of European Union studies has, to date, been guided primarily by intergovernmental theories of regional integration. This essay examines one intergovernmental model of regional integration, namely coalition building between France and Germany. In a case study of EU social policy, it is found that the trajectory of policy-making is not consistent with the predictions of the coalition version of intergovemmentalism. Rather, models of regional integration should pay more attention to the domestic politics of members to better explain their behavior at the European level.

International regimes and multinational corporations (MNCs) play active roles in domestic political processes. This article links these international systems variables to corporatist analyses of domestic structural adjustment politics in the Federal Republic of Germany. The interplay of regimes and MNCs with domestic politics is seen in case studies of the German steel and oil refining industries. It is demonstrated that corporatist models should incorporate international-level variables.

POLITICAL SCIENCE INCOURAGES A DIVISION BETWEEN COMPARATIVE POLITICS AND INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS. THIS ANALYSIS SUGGESTS CONSTRUCTING A BRIDGE BETWEEN THE TWO. AFTER A BRIEF REVIEW AND CRITIQUE OF CORPORATIST THEORY, THIS ARTICLE CONSIDERS THE POLITICS OF STRUCTURAL ADJUSTMENT IN THE GERMAN STEEL AND OIL REFINING INDUSTRIES, NOTING THE IMPACTS OF INTERNATIONAL REGIMES AND THE INTERNATIONALIZATION OF CAPITAL ON DOMESTIC POLITICS. IT WILL BE SHOWN THAT, ALTHOUGH SYSTEM-AND NATIONAL-LEVEL EXPLANATIONS CANNOT REPLACE ONE ANOTHER, VALUABLE OBSERVATIONS RESULT WHEN SYSTEM-AND NATION-LEVEL EXPLANATIONS COMPLEMENT ONE ANOTHER.

The effect of interest groups on public policy in industrial democracies can best be studied by recognizing the importance of the degree of urbanization. In countries where populations are concentrated in specific areas, as in Norway or Australia, established interest groups tend to draw the most support. However, the formation of interest groups is favored by decentralization of institutions. Interest groups tend to become isolated by technological development. Single-issue interest groups with a high degree of participation by experts are seen to have a good chance of affecting policy through avoiding public conflict, which is likely to distort the issues involved. Strategies for managing conflicts that do develop are described, & the important function of interest groups in the initial stages of policy making is assessed. D. Dunseath.