110 likes | 244 Views
1. POPULAR COMMITMENT TO AN EVER CLOSER UNION? A PRAGMATIC APPROACH PROFESSOR RICHARD ROSE FBA CENTRE FOR THE STUDY OF PUBLIC POLICY U. OF STRATHCLYDE www.cspp.strath.ac.uk/ UNIVERSITÉ LIBRE de BRUXELLES 21 February 2012. 16.02.12. 2. INTEGRATION BY STEALTH: A DYNAMIC PROCESS
E N D
1 POPULAR COMMITMENT TO AN EVER CLOSER UNION? A PRAGMATIC APPROACH PROFESSOR RICHARD ROSE FBA CENTRE FOR THE STUDY OF PUBLIC POLICY U. OF STRATHCLYDE www.cspp.strath.ac.uk/ UNIVERSITÉ LIBRE de BRUXELLES 21 February 2012
16.02.12 2 INTEGRATION BY STEALTH: A DYNAMIC PROCESS *Intergovernmental deliberations among elites and technocrats *Path dependent framework *Functional spillover *The acquis communautaire: no going back *Result: an ever closer union *Endorsed by a uninterested,uninformed and unconsulted citizens
16.02.12 3 POPULAR COMMITMENT *Commitment = Awareness + Understanding + Endorsement *Costly policies can't be achieved by stealth; need popular endorsement * EU efforts to engage grassroots citizens have limits: .Turnout at EP elections .Astroturf consultations with organizations .Citizens' Initiative
16.02.12 4 MEDIAN EUROPEAN OF TWO MINDS ABOUT EVER CLOSER UNION Q. 80 Do you think unification has already gone too far or should it be pushed further? Source: 2009 European Election Study, q. 80. Number of respondents, 27,069. Leave as is group includes 9 percent no opinion.
16.02.12 5 APPROVAL OF EU DOES NOT GUARANTEE WANTING MORE INTEGRATION Attitudes toward integration among all saying country's membership of the EU is a good thing. Source: 2009 European Election Study. Figure shows division of opinion on q 79 among the 17,079 respondents who described the EU as a good thing for their country.
16.02.12 6 MEPs OVERWHELMINGLY FOR EVER CLOSER UNION MEP's NATIONAL PARTY Source: EU Profiler data base of party programmes for the 2009 European Parliament election (www.euprofiler.eu).
16.02.12 7 VOTERS NOT COMMITTED TO EP POSITION ON EVER CLOSER UNION FITS: EP voter agrees with national party position UNCOMMITED: Voter has no opinion on integration MISFIT Voter's position disagrees with party Source: Combines EU Profiler data on national party positions on integration with European Election Study data on attitudes toward integration of those EES respondents naming the party they voted for (N: 12,496).
16.02.12 8 AMBIGUITY OF EQUILIBRIUM *STATIC: Hard to get anything agreed, stagnation *POSITIVE FEEDBACK: Benign spillosvefrs *NEGATIVE FEEDBACK from some spillovers .French and Dutch rejection of Constitution for Europe .Schengen and immigration .Eurozone crisis *EXTERNAL CHALLENGES AND SHOCKS .2008 global economic crisis .Trans-national terrorism
16.02.12 9 A PRAGMATIC APPROACH TO EU POLICY ANALYSIS PRAGMATISM : Evaluate specific proposals by their expected consequences Diagnose problems by examining experience. Examine cause and effect links in proposed solution Evaluate likely consequences for country, citizens, political self-interest Decisions arrived at on an issue by issue basis No a priori commitment for or against integration; it is a byproduct
16.02.12 10 A PRAGMATIC APPROACH TO INTEGRATION Big issues with visible costs and benefits create schizophrenia in national governments: Consensual personalities in Council, contentious in national parliaments Add zero-order politics to Reif/Schmitt 1st and 2nd order: need to consult citizens by referendum Current position of treating referendums as local option excludes most EU citizens; pan-European referendums would not Enhance cooperation among the willing and opt outs by the unwilling have broader support support and more clarity than a fudged or ambiguous agreement Dynamic consequences of differential cooperation. .If laggards catch up with leaders, an ever-closer union .If differential national judgments maintained, the geometry of Europe becomes less hierarchical, multi-level and more variable.
16.02.12 11 TO DISCUSS 1. To what extent is pragmatic evaluation already the norm? 2. Is pragmatism likely to replace commitment to an ever closer Union ? 3. To what extent is EU research unbalanced by treating integration as normal and, by implication desirable?