Suchergebnisse

The Eurozone crisis exposed the incompleteness of the Economic and Monetary Union's governance framework thereby prompting the promotion of a multitude of reform packages and proposals. This simultaneously induced conflict among EU governments on both design and content of such reforms. In case of the financial transaction tax (FTT) proposal, which failed to garner consensus among member governments, it illustrates Ireland's disapproval clashing with favorable German and French stances. While these governments aligned on the necessity to reform, the process of harmonizing EU financial governance proved rather difficult. In analyzing governments' variation of reform support or opposition, the societal approach to governmental preference formation is employed. This is considerably conducive in directing academic attention to the role of two explanatory variables, domestic material interests and value-based ideas, in shaping governments' reform positions. This article encompasses a comprehensive comparative account of domestic preference formation and responsiveness of three EU governments (France, Germany and Ireland), in the case study of the FTT, and demonstrates that the two societal dynamics are prone to have played a role in shaping financial reform controversies. By building on and contributing to Eurozone crisis literature, this approach seems appropriate in analyzing financial governance reform due to the crisis' domestic impact resulting in increased public salience, issue politicization and an advanced role of elected politicians.

Die Dissertationsschrift nutzt eine theoriegeleitete empirische Analyse, um die divergierenden Handelspositionen der britischen und deutschen Regierung in den Verhandlungen zum EU-Korea-Freihandelsabkommen zu erklären. Durch die Anwendung des "Societal Approach" werden hierbei systematisch sowohl materielle Interessen (Wirtschaftssektoren/Gewerkschaften) als auch wertgestützte Ideen Wähler/NGOs) gegenübergestellt und herausgearbeitet, unter welchen Bedingungen eine der beiden Variablen die Regierungspositionen prägen können. Die Arbeit trägt dazu bei, die Wissenslücke über nationale Handelspolitikformulierung zu schließen und zu verstehen, wie und von wem Handelspositionen von EU-Regierungen geformt werden. Da die EU-Handelspolitik verstärkt angefochten und politisiert wird, bietet ein innerstaatlicher Fokus auf die Variation zwischen Handelspositionen von Regierungen eine aufschlussreiche Perspektive. ; This study employs a theoretically-guided, systematic empirical analysis in order to explain the diverging trade positions of the British and German governments in the EU-Korea FTA negotiations. The societal approach to governmental preference formation is applied to empirically test the independent variables domestic interests (economic sectors/trade unions) and ideas (voters/NGOs), which are employed to explain variation in these governmental trade positions. Additionally, the study focuses on the conditions for the prevalence of either of the independent variables. This study contributes to filling the salient gap in knowledge about national trade policy formulation and understanding of how, and by whom, trade positions of EU governments are formed. As EU trade policy has become increasingly contested and politicised, a domestic focus to account for variation across governmental trade positions offers a timely and relevant point of view.