DOCSLIB.ORG

Regional Integration: from the European Experience to Southeast Asia

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Regional Integration: from the European Experience to Southeast Asia Regional Integration: From the European Experience to Southeast Asia Chenchen Li European Studies: Politics, Societies, and Cultures Bachelor Thesis 15 Credits Spring Semester/2020-05-22 Supervisor: Corina Filipescu Contents List of Figures ………………………………………………………………….. 3 Abstract ………………………………………………………………………… 4 List of Abbreviations …………………………………………………………… 5 1. Introduction ……………………………………………………………. 6 1.1 Why EU and ASEAN? ……………………………………………………. 6 1.2 Aims and research questions ……………………………………………… 8 1.3 Structure of the thesis ……………………………………………………... 9 2. Literature review ……………………………………………………….. 10 2.1 Discussion of classical integration theories ……………………………….. 10 2.2 Comparative regionalism between the EU and ASEAN …………………... 12 3. Theoretical framework of the thesis ………………………………...…. 14 3.1 New regionalism ……………………………………………………….….. 14 3.2 Liberal Intergovernmentalism ……………………………………………... 16 4. Research design and methods ………………………………………….. 17 5. Background ……………………………………………………………. 19 5.1 The European Union ..………….…………………………………………. 19 5.2 Association of Southeast Asian Nations ……………………...………..…. 21 5.3 Conclusion ……………...…………………………………………………. 23 6. The formation of new regional project in Southeast Asia and Europe … 24 6.1 Economic liberalization reform …………………………………………… 24 6.1.1 Malaysia …………………………………………………………………. 25 6.1.2 Thailand …………………………………………………………………. 26 6.1.3 Philippines ………………………………………………………………. 27 6.1.4 Indonesia ………………………………………………………………… 28 1 6.1.5 The European Community ……………………………………………. 28 6.1.6 Open economy consequence ………………………………………….. 29 6.2 Institutional difference ………………………………………………….. 31 6.3 Conclusion ………………………………………………………………. 37 7. Integration development since 2013 …………………………………. 38 7.1 Intergovernmental cooperation and competition ………………………… 38 7.2 Inter-state bargaining …………………………………………………….. 42 7.3 Conclusion ………………………………………………………………... 44 8. Final conclusions and reflection ……………………………………… 45 8.1 Summarize the findings …………………………………………………. 45 8.2 Recommendation for further study ……………………………………… 46 8.3 Final reflection …………………………………………………………… 46 Reference …………………………………………………………………….. 47 2 List of Figures Figure 1: Intra-ASEAN and Extra-ASEAN Trade 2012-2018 ……………………. 40 Figure 2: Intra-EU and Extra- EU Trade 2014-2018 ……………………………… 40 Figure 3: FDI Flows in ASEAN, 1995-2017 (Billions of dollars) ………………… 42 Figure 4: Vietnam Exports to Indonesia of Rice ………………………………….. 44 ​ ​ 3 Regional Integration: From the European Experience to Southeast Asia Abstract This thesis is based on the theoretical knowledge derived from the European integration experience to conduct a comparative study between the EU and ASEAN. This thesis investigates how endogenous factors affect how exogenous factors influence the EU and ASEAN institution building process within the European Single Market and ASEAN Free Trade Area. It argues that ASEAN members' domestic political interest and national preference formed within their cultural context as a result of their informal institutional economic cooperation. The thesis reviews literature and finds that the European model cannot be simply applied to ASEAN, thus a combination of new regionalism and liberal intergovernmentalism seeks to contribute alternatives to different aspects in the analysis of ASEAN regional integration. 4 List of Abbreviations ASEAN Association of Southeast Asian Nations AFTA ASEAN Free Trade Area AIA ASEAN Investment Agreement CEPT Common Effective Preferential Tariff DSM Dispute Settlement Mechanism ECSC European Coal and Steel Community EC European Community ECJ European Court of Justice EP European Parliament EMU European Monetary Union EU European Union ESM European Single Market FDI Foreign Direct Investment NEP New Economic Policy NTB Non-Tariff Barriers SEA Single European Act 5 1. Introduction This thesis aims to expand our understanding of the regional integration process in Southeast Asia by taking the European Union (EU) and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) as a comparative case study to examine the different trajectory of their integration development. The objective of this research is to analyse the outcomes of regional projects in ASEAN and the EU through their institution-building process in their economic sector by systematically applying theories that are derived from the European experience: new regionalism and liberal intergovernmentalism. This thesis will contribute to the comparative regionalism scholarship, by study of comparative regionalism scholarship based on previous theoretical and empirical studies between the EU and ASEAN (Katzenstein 1996, Söderbaum2009; 2015, Acharya and ​ Johnston 2007a; 2007b) to understand the regional integration process in ASEAN. By ​ applying concepts such as open economy, domestic interests and national preference, cost of sovereignty, ASEAN Way and inter-state bargain to analyse the roles they played in influencing the ASEAN economic integration process. Additionally, this thesis seeks to contribute alternatives for different aspects and analysis in ASEAN regional integration. 1.1 Why EU and ASEAN? In the recent decades, the world has considerably changed in terms of regionalisation and regionalism. Since the late 1980s we have also seen the growth of the changes in the functioning of the world economy and how multinational companies run their operations, and the weakening of nation states as the main position for formulating and implementing policies, which was characterised as new wave of regionalism (Hennet 2005; Söderbaum 2000 2009). Since then, the growth of regional cooperation and economic interdependence of a globalizing world have taken centre stage in international political economy. Empirically, the EU has been seen as an economic superpower, and a significant influence in the realm of international diplomacy and broader world order (Hill et al. 2017:4). Hence, the European integration process experience has drawn attention from other countries to replicate and extend their relations and seek economic dependence with other countries in order to benefit their own economies from what regional integration brings (Pattharapong 2014). As a result, 6 we have seen a number of regional preferential trading agreements across the continents in the past decades, such as NAFTA in North America, AcFTA in Africa Union, AFTA in Southeast Asia. Taking examples of the EU and ASEAN, the most noticeable difference between the EU and ​ ​ ASEAN is the outcomes of their regional project. The EU has deep political and economic integration with supranational authority, while ASEAN preserves its national sovereignty and informal institutions mainly focus on regional cooperation. The EU’s supranational body and the roles of different institutions ensure the agreements and treaties are implemented accordingly into national legislation and monitoring the member’s behaviour. In ASEAN, on the other hand, the agreements and the approach are non-intervention and consultation based (Acharya 1997a; 2004). In this respect, it clearly shows different regional projects generated ​ ​ different outcomes, and the fundamental difference between the EU and ASEAN rests on their institutional design. Thus, it raises questions of what are the key factors that influenced their institutional design in their building process which generate different outcomes and what are their motivations to create regional projects? Studying the EU and ASEAN itself is complicated, and several relevant elements have to be taken into account when attempting to compare them. First of all, we have to consider the chronological time difference between the EU and ASEAN. Eliassen and Árnadóttir (2014) note that the EU has existed longer and developed more rapidly than ASEAN. Thus, in which comparable political period of time is reasonable to present when comparing them? For example, if we compare the EU today to ASEAN in the 1970s, that is comparing a supranational institution to a slow development of regional organisation, the difference lay significant and the contrast of the findings could be invalid. Secondly, the political systems are different between these two organisations. All EU members are democratic polites, but ASEAN countries are mostly authoritarian capitalist or semi-democratic with differences between one another. Therefore, with these considerations and in order to give a fair standpoint, this thesis set two political times. The first is in the early 1980s to 1992 when both regions had economic impact from the recession and started the outward thinking to enhance trade, and that period was when new regional trade agreements and their own single market started. The second period set after two financial crises, and it aims to seek the 7 verification of their patterns of behaviour over the time and also avoid repeated study. Additionally, the EU has more institutional development in the economic sector than ASEAN, the European Single Market was built based on the Common Market since the Treaty of Rome in 1957. Thus, in line with the timeline setting, in the analysis parts I examine the EU as one entity and the core members in the ASEAN. 1.2 Aims and research questions The aim of this thesis is to understand the regional integration in ASEAN and to investigate what are the main motivations, driving forces and reasons for emerging regionalism, and why these factors affect regional institutionalization. The comparative case study aims to analyse the difference between the EU and ASEAN by examining the European Single Market (ESM)
Load more

Recommended publications
  • UNU/CRIS E-Occasional Papers O-2003/5 Is There a Comparative
    UNU/CRIS e-Occasional Papers O-2003/5 Is There a Comparative Perspective between the European Union and NAFTA? Alejandro Chanona* * Director of the Center Of European Studies, National University of Mexico, Faculty of Social and Political Sciences ([email protected]) Is There a Comparative Perspective between the European Union and NAFTA? Introduction In 1991, a Conference was held in London regarding the launching of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). A member of the audience asked the speaker if he considered whether there was any chance for the NAFTA to be like the European Community; the answer was negative. The NAFTA was seen since its beginning as a simple Free Trade Agreement, maybe similar to an EFTA, rather than as a potential community. Time has proven that the respectable scholar was wrong; however, we cannot blame him for thinking like that. On the contrary, it was pretty ambitious to consider that NAFTA could take a step beyond what a FTA involves, theoretically speaking. There are currently several expectations around NAFTA that clearly foresee something beyond a simple FTA. Moreover, there are several analytical studies of a comparative nature, with the EU as the standard of comparison, that raise doubt over the idea of a North American Community1. If we agree that the NAFTA is a region in the making and its objectives tend to be overtaken by the dynamics of the region, we are in business. North America has become a real region for security reasons, for economic advantages and for political interests. The point is whether the NAFTA represents a distinctive model or its evolution reveals common features with the European experience.
    [Show full text]
  • Intergovernmentalism
    Intergovernmentalism MI CHELLE CINI Chapter Contents • Introduction • What is intergovernmentalism? • Hoffmann and his critics • Beyond classical intergovernmentalism • Liberal intergovernmentalism and its critics • Conclusion: the future af intergovernmentalism Reader's Guide This chapter provides an overview of intergovernmentalist integration theory, focusing ticularly on the works ofStanley Hoffmann and Andrew Moravcsik.ltfirst introduces tbe premises and assumptions of intergovernmentalism, identifying its realist underpinnin the state-centrism which provides the core ofthe approach, before examining in more the specific characteristics of Hoffmann's work. The subsequent section also examines ofthe ways in which intergovernmentalist thinking has contributed to different conce zations of European integration. The topics covered in this section are confederalis domestic politics approach; and institutional analyses that emphasize the 'locked-in' of nation states within the integration processoLast, but certainly not least, the chapter vides a brief review of Moravcsik's liberal intergovernmentalism, which since the mid 1 has become the main focal point for intergovernmentalist research. Intergovernmentalism 87 ntroduction m the mid 1960s to the present day, intergovern- intergovernmentalism?' This section outlines the ntalism-in one shape or another-has pro- general characteristics of the approach. The section ed students of the European Community/Union that follows introduces Hoffmann's early ideas; this a conceptual account of the European integra- section also addresses the main criticisms of his n processo For decades, students of European particular brand of intergovernmentalisrn, ation learnt about the two competing Hoffmann's groundbreaking insights into the phe- roaches which explained (and in some cases nomenon of European integration, together with icted) the course ofEuropean integration: neo- critiques of his work, led to new developments in ionalism (covered in Chapter 5) and intergov- European integration theory from the 1970s entalism.
    [Show full text]
  • Regional Integration and the Evolution of the European Polity: on the Fiftieth Anniversary of the Journal of Common
    JOBNAME: No Job Name PAGE: 1 SESS: 16 OUTPUT: Thu Nov 17 21:19:10 2011 SUM: 7E087AC6 /v2451/blackwell/journals/JCMS_v50_is1/jcms_2224 JCMS 2012 Volume 50. Number S1. pp. 1–17 Regional Integration and the Evolution of the European Polity: On the Fiftieth Anniversary of the Journal of Common Market Studiesjcms_2224 1..18 WALTER MATTLI AND ALEC STONE SWEET Introduction This special issue commemorates the fiftieth anniversary of the Journal of Common Market Studies. Over five decades, the journal has charted the deep transformations wrought by integration in Europe: of markets and economic organization; law and courts; party systems and interest group politics; and of regulation, both public and private. Along the way, scholarship on the EC/EU gradually turned to the pervasive impact of integration and supranational governance on national structures; to how the various levels of decision making interact to produce and implement policy; and to public opinion, cultural identity and the deep normative questions concerning how to assess the political legitimacy of the EU. Once catering to a relatively small community of specialists, there is now virtually no important strain of social scientific, legal or historical research on contemporary Europe that falls outside the journal’s purview. Arguably, JCMS is the most important and successful interdisciplinary forum for the publication of research on any single polity – in this case, the European Union. Although much has changed, major themes developed in this special issue found expression in the early journal. The first twenty issues (1962–1967) contained articles on voting procedures (Sidjanski, 1962), the state of public opinion on the European Com- munity (Gallup, 1963); the concept and practice of ‘supranational’ authority (Rosenstiel, 1963; Deutsch, 1963); and supposed distinctions between the process of ‘functional integration’ and that of federalization (Mitrany 1965).
    [Show full text]
  • Reforming Multilateralism in Post-Covid Times
    ited for A NEW MULTILATERALISM EDITED BY MARIO TELÒ REFORMING MULTILATERALISM IN POST-COVID TIMES FOR A MORE REGIONALISED, BINDING AND LEGITIMATE UNITED NATIONS EDITED BY Mario Telò REFORMING MULTILATERALISM IN POST-COVID TIMES IN POST-COVID REFORMING MULTILATERALISM PUBLISHED IN DECEMBER 2020 BY Foundation for European Progressive Studies Avenue des Arts 46 B-1000 Brussels, Belgium +32 2 234 69 00 [email protected] www.feps-europe.eu @FEPS_Europe EDITOR AND PROJECT SCIENTIFIC DIRECTOR Mario Telò LEADER OF THE PROJECT Maria João Rodrigues, President, Foundation for European Progressive Studies FEPS COORDINATORS OF THE PROJECT Hedwig Giusto, Susanne Pfeil IAI COORDINATOR OF THE PROJECT Ettore Greco COPYRIGHT © 2020 Foundation for European Progressive Studies (FEPS) PROOFREADING AND COPY EDITING Nicky Robinson GRAPHIC DESIGN Triptyque.be COVER PHOTO Shutterstock PRINTED BY Oficyna Wydawnicza ASPRA-JR Published with the financial support of the European Parliament. The views expressed in this report are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the European Parliament. ISBN 978-2-930769-46-2 PROJECT PARTNERS FRIEDRICH-EBERT-STIFTUNG NEW YORK OFFICE 747 Third Avenue, Suite 34D, New York, NY 10017, United States +1 (212) 687-0208 [email protected] https://www.feps-europe.eu @fesnewyork FONDATION JEAN-JAURÈS 12 Cité Malesherbes, 75009 Paris, France +33 (0)1 40 23 24 00 https://jean-jaures.org [email protected] @j_jaures CENTRO STUDI DI POLITICA INTERNAZIONALE (CeSPI) Piazza Venezia 11, 00187 Roma, Italy +39
    [Show full text]
  • European Integration (Theory) in Times of Crisis a Comparison of the Euro and Schengen Crises
    European Integration (Theory) in Times of Crisis A comparison of the Euro and Schengen crises Frank Schimmelfennig, ETH Zürich, [email protected] Abstract The European Union has gone through major crises of its two flagship projects of the 1990s: the Euro and Schengen. Both crises had structurally similar causes and beginnings: exogenous shocks exposed the functional shortcomings of both integration projects and produced sharp distributional conflict among governments as well as an unprecedented politicization of European integration in member state societies. Yet they have resulted in significantly different outcomes: whereas the Euro crisis has brought about a major deepening of integration, the Schengen crisis has not. I put forward a neofunctionalist explanation of these different outcomes, which emphasizes variation in transnational interdependence and supranational capacity across the two policy areas. Acknowledgments For comments on previous versions of the paper, I thank audiences at an ACCESS EUROPE seminar at VU Amsterdam, the 2017 annual conference of the Swiss Political Science Association in St. Gallen, the 2017 EUSA Convention in Miami, and the Euro-CEFG workshop at the University of Rotterdam. Special thanks to Klaus Armingeon, Ben Crum, Madeleine Hosli, Matthias Mattijs, Thomas Spijkerboer, and Jonathan Zeitlin. Introduction The European Union (EU) has come to operate in crisis mode permanently. When the Treaty of Lisbon entered into force in December 2009, the EU finally appeared to have achieved institutional consolidation after the failure of the Constitutional Treaty. Around the same time, however, the mounting Greek balance-of-payment problem signaled the start of the Euro crisis. As soon as “Grexit” was averted in dramatic negotiations in July 2015, the migration flow across the Aegean Sea spiraled out of control, triggering a crisis of the Schengen regime of free movement across internal EU borders.
    [Show full text]
  • 2 Bringing Constructivist Integration Theory out of the Clouds: Has It Landed Yet? Andrew Moravcsik
    04 Forum (jr/d) 3/5/01 11:29 am Page 226 226 European Union Politics 2(2) my loosely positivist epistemology, the strong emphasis on agency, the neglect of recursive practices. Clearly, this middle way loses part of the constructivist train (Joergensen, 1997; Diez, 1999: 363–4). My micro-focus limits what can be said about collective identity formation in Europe (Marcussen et al., 1999), or about processes of state/international socialization (Adler and Barnett, 1998: chs 1, 2). Moreover, I am unable to capture fully the mutually constitu- tive dynamics between my persuading agents and broader social structures because of my epistemological stance. Thinking in terms of variables and causal process tracing requires something be held constant for the analysis to proceed. My response to such concerns is two-fold. Theoretically, the approach should be viewed as supplying much-needed micro-foundational building blocks for more sweeping—and often heuristic—constructivist arguments about collective identity formation or state learning (also Checkel, 2001b). Practically, my response is ‘so what?’ The concern here is to develop oper- ationalizeable social science theory (built on positivist or more interpretative epistemologies), and not social theory. My strong sense is that constructivism still has too much of the latter and not enough of the former. So, indeed, I have lost something. But I have gained the beginnings of a testable con- structivist research programme, which addresses an issue of central concern to Europeanists, and does so in a way that promotes dialogue with both rational choice and interpretative scholars (also Risse and Wiener, 1999: 775–7).
    [Show full text]
  • Theorizing Regionalism: Cooperation, Integration, and Governance by Tanja A
    Theorizing Regionalism: Cooperation, Integration, and Governance by Tanja A. Börzel Prepared for Tanja A. Börzel/Thomas Risse (eds.), Oxford Handbook of Comparative Regionalism (Oxford: Oxford University Press, in prep.) “[W]ith the exception of European institutions, regional institutions have occupied a small and insignificant part of the overall theoretical literature on international institutions” (Acharya and Johnston 2007a: 2). The end of the Cold War saw a surge in regionalism. While the number of preferential trading agreements (PTA) exploded (Mansfield and Pevehouse 2013), long-standing regional organizations, such as the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) or the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), experienced the delegation of more political authority and policy competencies in the past two decades (Börzel 2013). These two trends of more and deeper regionalism, respectively, are often attributed to processes of diffusion or interdependent decision-making. Regional cooperation and integration spread across time and space once the constraints of geopolitics had ceased to exist (Risse in this volume). This chapter explores how mainstream theories of regional cooperation and integration account for the changes in the quantity and quality of regionalism.1 Unlike diffusion, these theories implicitly or explicitly conceptualize regionalism as driven by independent decision- making of regional actors responding to causal factors located within or outside the region. The chapter starts by arguing that the dominant theories of regional cooperation and integration share a bias towards taking states as the main drivers of regionalism and 1 Critical theories to regionalism, such as the World Oder Approach, are dealt with by the chapters on new regionalism (Söderbaum in this volume) and non-Western approaches (Acharya in this volume) Börzel Theories of Cooperation, Integration and Governance focusing on processes of formal institution-building at the regional level.
    [Show full text]
  • APPENDIX Is Liberal Intergovernmentalism Regressive?
    APPENDIX Is Liberal Intergovernmentalism Regressive? Table of Contents 1. Quality of evidence p.1 2. Charles De Gaulle, Memoirs of Hope: Renewal and Endeavor p.5 3. Jean Lacouture, De Gaulle the Ruler p.11 4. Miriam Camps, European Unification in the 1960s: From the Veto to the Crisis p.16 5. Lord Gladwyn, The Memoirs of Lord Gladwyn p.19 6. Susanne Bodenheimer, Political Union: A Microcosm of European Politics p.22 7. Paul-Henri Spaak, The Continuing Battle: Memoirs of a European p.26 8. Wolfram Kaiser, Using Europe, Abusing the European p.31 9. John Campbell, Edward Heath, A Biography p.35 10. Alfred Grosser, French Foreign Policy Under de Gaulle p.38 11. France: De Gaulle’s deliberate deception? p.43 This appendix probes key sources that Andrew Moravcsik uses in the Choice for Europe to advance a liberal intergovernmentalist theory of European integration.1 The core claims of CfE are that the institutional structure of the European Union is determined by intergovernmental bargaining, that governments are motivated chiefly by economics not geopolitics, and that governments do so in response to the demands of producer groups. By arguing that international negotiation is the key to explaining European treaties and by placing international negotiation in the context of domestic interest aggregation, the book gave legitimacy to a field – diplomacy – that appeared out of touch with contemporary political science. The book argues against the dominant view that diplomacy was oriented to power politics. Moravcsik (AM) argues that negotiations are undertaken by ‘national leaders who consistently pursued economic interests—primarily the commercial interests of powerful economic producers and secondarily the macroeconomic preferences of ruling governmental coalitions’ (CfE: 3).
    [Show full text]
  • A Liberal Intergovernmentalist and Neofunctionalist Explanation of the Fiscal Pact
    Austerity for All A Liberal Intergovernmentalist and Neofunctionalist Explanation of the Fiscal Pact Master thesis by: Florian Lambert s4007344 Radboud University Nijmegen, Political Science, International Relations Supervisor: dr. Angela Wigger September 2014 Abstract In response to the European debt crisis, EU countries, excluding Great Britain and the Czech Republic, agreed in December 2011 on the so-called Fiscal Pact. This agreement entailed that all the Eurozone member states have to adhere to strict budgetary rules, enforced by the European Commission. That budgetary powers were ceded to the European Commission is surprising, because the EU member states have always been reluctant to do so. The goal of this thesis is to try to answer the question of why this specific path of further integration was chosen to overcome the crisis. The research employed two different theories of integration to answer this question: liberal intergovernmentalism and neofunctionalism. It was found that the path taken could be explained on the basis of liberal intergovernmentalism focusing on the economically largest EU countries, particularly the interests of the powerful German and French financial sectors. Having invested heavily in the bond markets of the troubled Eurozone countries, it was in their interest that these loans will be repaid. The Fiscal Pact, with its strict budgetary rules, ensures that the chance of a default in these countries as a result of the debt load would be minimized. Furthermore, the budgetary rules forces these countries to privatize industries and liquidate state assets, leading to investment opportunities for the German and French financial sectors. ii Contents Chapter 1: Introduction .........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • New Institutionalism(S)
    New Institutionalism(s) Neo-functionalism and intergovernmentalism are ‘grand theories’ of European politics that seek to explain the overall direction and developments of European integration. By contrast, the new institutionalisms are ‘middle range’ theories that aim to account for specific European integration processes, but that do not seek to explain all of European integration within a single theory (Nugent, 2003, p.488). The move towards to such middle range theory in the context of European studies grew out of dissatisfaction on the part of some theorists with grand theory. Some scholars felt that theories such as neo-functionalism either missed the complexities of European Union or, if these complexities were factored into account, became too unwieldy to be useful (Nugent, 2003, p.488). Furthermore, in explaining the major episodes of EU integration, these grand theories do not really account for the day to day, week by week politics of the EU. Better, perhaps, in that case to focus on explaining smaller, but more manageable aspects of the European politics (Nugent, 2003, p.488). These middle range theories (such as the new institutionalisms) seek to do just that, often borrowing approaches from public policy and comparative politics that are normally used to study domestic politics, rather than International Relations. As an approach to the study of the EU, new institutionalism rests on the assumption that ‘institutions matter’ in European politics (Nugent, 2003, p.488-9). However, new institutionalism is not a single theory, but rather a set of approaches, each of which looking at institutions in a different way, drawing out the different manner in which institutions impact on political processes.
    [Show full text]
  • Critical Political Economy
    WORKING PAPER Critical Political Economy Bastiaan van Apeldoorn and Laura Horn No. 87 | May 2018 2 | KFG Working Paper No. 87 | May 2018 KFG Working Paper Series Edited by the Kolleg-Forschergruppe “The Transformative Power of Europe” The KFG Working Paper Series serves to disseminate the research results of the Kolleg-Forschergruppe by making them available to a broader public. It means to enhance academic exchange as well as to strengthen and broaden existing basic research on internal and external diffusion processes in Europe and the European Union. All KFG Working Papers are available on the KFG website at www.transformeurope.eu or can be ordered in print via email to [email protected]. Copyright for this issue: Bastiaan van Apeldoorn, Laura Horn Editorial assistance and production: Helena Rietmann, Sarah Barasa, Lisa Fenner van Apeldorn/Horn 2018: Critical Political Economy, KFG Working Paper Series, No. 87, May 2018, Kolleg-Forscher- gruppe (KFG) “The Transformative Power of Europe“, Freie Universität Berlin. ISSN 1868-6834 (Print) ISSN 1868-7601 (Internet) This publication has been funded by the German Research Foundation (DFG). Freie Universität Berlin Kolleg-Forschergruppe “The Transformative Power of Europe: The European Union and the Diffusion of Ideas” Ihnestr. 26 14195 Berlin Germany Phone: +49 (0)30- 838 57033 Fax: +49 (0)30- 838 57096 [email protected] www.transformeurope.eu Critical Political Economy | 3 Critical Political Economy Bastiaan van Apeldoorn and Laura Horn Abstract European integration is a fundamentally open-ended and contested process. Within the ‘mosaic of European integration theories’, critical political economy perspectives highlight the imbalances and struc- tural power asymmetries of the European project, and how they have become manifest in the multiple crises in Europe.
    [Show full text]
  • European Integration (Theory) in Times of Crisis Why the Euro Crisis Led to More Integration but the Migrant Crisis Did Not
    European Integration (Theory) in Times of Crisis Why the euro crisis led to more integration but the migrant crisis did not Frank Schimmelfennig, ETH Zürich, [email protected] EUSA, Miami, May 2017 Abstract The European Union has gone through major crises of its two flagship projects of the 1990s: Economic and Monetary Union and Schengen. Both crises had structurally similar causes and beginnings: exogenous shocks exposed the functional shortcomings of both integration projects and produced sharp distributional conflict among governments as well as an unprecedented politicization of European integration in member state societies. Yet they have resulted in significantly different outcomes. Whereas the euro crisis has brought about a major deepening of integration in the euro zone, the migrant crisis has not. I put forward a neofunctionalist explanation of these different outcomes, which emphasizes variation in transnational interdependence and supranational capacity across the two policy areas. Acknowledgments For comments on previous versions of the paper, I thank audiences at an ACCESS EUROPE seminar at VU Amsterdam and at the 2017 annual conference of the Swiss Political Science Association in St. Gallen. Special thanks to Klaus Armingeon, Ben Crum, Thomas Spijkerboer, and Jonathan Zeitlin. Introduction The European Union (EU) has come to operate in crisis mode permanently. When the Treaty of Lisbon entered into force in December 2009, the EU finally appeared to have achieved institutional consolidation after the failure of the Constitutional Treaty. Around the same time, however, the mounting Greek balance-of-payment problem signaled the start of the euro crisis. As soon as ‘Grexit’ was averted in dramatic negotiations in July 2015, the migration flow across the Aegean Sea spiraled out of control.
    [Show full text]