NEW KIDS ON THE EUROPEAN BLOCK: FINNISH AND SWEDISH ADAPTATION TO THE EUROPEAN UNION? Jennifer Leigh Novack Thesis submitted for the degree of PhD in International Relations London School of Economics and Political Science University of London April 2002 UMI Number: U61BB44 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Dissertation Publishing UMI U613344 Published by ProQuest LLC 2014. Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 TW£s £ s £ Sos/ 9 2 ABSTRACT New Kids on the European Block: Finnish and Swedish Adaptation to the European Union? Jennifer Leigh Novack London School of Economics and Political Science University of London Thesis submitted for the degree of PhD in International Relations This thesis examines Finnish and Swedish membership in the European Union since the two Nordic countries joined (along with Austria) in January 1995 to become “new kids on the European block.” The author compares the strategies that national decision-makers have pursued in EU policy-making to assess the nature and extent of their adaptation to the European Union. This analysis relies on case studies of three policy areas: 1) Economic and Monetary Union (with a focus on the decision on whether or not to adopt the Euro in the first wave); 2) relations with non-EU neighbours in Northern Europe (with particular attention given to EU enlargement and the Northern Dimension Initiative); and 3) public access to documents. Although the thesis concentrates primarily on empirical analysis, it also provides a theoretical critique. The author argues that differences in the historical backgrounds, institutions, cultures, and identities of Finland and Sweden have led to differences in their approaches to the EU. The thesis presents a challenge to existing theoretical frameworks that leave little or no room for the four factors that are emphasised here, with particular attention given to the approaches of Andrew Moravcsik (1998) and Christine Ingebritsen (1998). 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract 2 Table of Contents 3 Acknowledgements 5 Abbreviations 8 Section I: The Backdrop Chapter One: Introduction 12 Constructing a Thesis 14 The Continuing Relevance of the State? 15 Theory and Research Design 18 A Niche of Its Own? 29 Chapter Two: A Theoretical Critique 31 A Critique of Existing Approaches 31 Towards the Construction of a New Framework 63 Chapter Three: Meet Two New Kids on the European Block 70 Two Similar “Kids” 71 Two Different “Kids” 92 Consequences for this Study 139 Section II: The Empirical Evidence Chapter Four: Economic and Monetary Union (EMU) 143 Two Similar Approaches 143 Two Different Approaches 152 Analysis and Conclusion 168 4 Chapter Five: Relations with Non-EU Neighbours in Northern Europe 173 Two Similar Approaches 173 Two Different Approaches 186 Analysis and Conclusion 196 Chapter Six: Public Access to Documents 200 Two Similar Approaches 200 Two Different Approaches 211 Analysis and Conclusion 222 Section III: What It All Means Chapter Seven: Conclusion: Finnish and Swedish Adaptation to the European Union? 227 Two Similar Countries 228 Two Different Countries 230 Empirical Conclusions about Finnish and Swedish Adaptation 233 Methodological and Theoretical Findings 236 In Conclusion 240 Bibliography 242 Appendix 272 Table of Finnish Prime Ministers 1917-2000 272 Table of Finnish Presidents 1919-2000 273 Table of Swedish Prime Ministers 1905-2000 274 Map of Sweden about 1658 275 Map of Modem Finland 276 Map of Modem Sweden 277 5 Acknowledgements There are many individuals and groups without whose guidance and support this PhD thesis would never have been a reality. My co-supervisors John Madeley and Paul Taylor provided constructive criticism and support throughout the process. I am particularly appreciative of their continued faith in my abilities and their patience as my thesis topic evolved. My thanks also go to Erik Ringmar, who stood in for John Madeley for a year while he was on leave. I would also like to thank the participants (both the faculty members and the research students) in the doctoral workshops in which I participated in the European Institute, the Government Department, and the International Relations Department at the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE). They not only gave their comments on draft chapters of my thesis but also provided stimulating academic discussions that often provided inspiration for writing and research as well as a sense of community. As the list of individuals at LSE whose support I wish to acknowledge would be too long to list here, I hope that all of those to whom I am indebted will feel themselves included in this statement. I was fortunate during my time as a PhD student that I had a second academic “home” in the Political Science Department at Stockholm University, which welcomed me into their fold during the academic year 1997-1998 and the summer of 1999. Again, there were so many individuals in the department who shared their ideas and suggestions that it would not be possible to list them. Both the faculty and the students succeeded in making me feel welcome in their department, and the courses and workshops in which I had the opportunity to participate made a definite contribution to my thesis. I was also able to meet academics in Finland and to participate in doctoral workshops organised by Lauri Karvonen and Jan Sundberg in Helsinki and in Turku, where I was able to present my own research. To all of those in the academic community in Finland who shared their insights I am also grateful. I was also fortunate in that I was able to meet a variety of Swedish researchers, including those based outside Stockholm University. A particularly vital aspect of 6 my time in Sweden was my participation in the Swedish Network for European Research in Political Science, which included me in their meetings even when I was once again based in the UK. Through the network I was able to meet researchers (located throughout the country) who shared their own research with me and gave their comments on mine. At meetings in Gothenburg, Stockholm, Umea, and Uppsala, I presented drafts of my research on which I received particularly useful comments, as the participants gave thorough attention to my writing and to providing me with constructive criticism. I would also like to thank the participants at other conferences and meetings, who provided useful insights. These include those whom I met at the European Community Studies Association Biennial International Conference in Pittsburgh, PA, USA; the Finnish Institute for International Affairs Research Seminar on the Northern Dimension in Helsinki, Finland; the Nordic Political Science Association Conference in Uppsala, Sweden; the Political Studies Association Conference in London, UK; the Young Academics Seminars at the Finnish Institute in London, UK; and several meetings organised by the University Association of Contemporary European Studies. On a related note, there are several groups that I would like to thank for making my attendance at conferences and meetings possible through their financial support. These include the Finnish Institute for International Affairs, the LSE International Relations Department, the LSE Postgraduate Travel Fund, the Swedish Network for European Research in Political Science, and the University Association for Contemporary European Studies. I would also like to extend my sincere appreciation to the many policy-makers in Finland, Sweden, and the UK who offered their time to discuss their experiences, expertise, and views with me. These ranged from brief chats following speeches to interviews lasting in excess of two hours; to all I am extremely grateful. Furthermore, I would like to thank the staff of the many libraries I used for their assistance, particularly those at the Leybum Library at Washington and Lee University in Lexington, VA, USA who went beyond their normal obligations to ensure that the months that I spent in Virginia were successful. 7 On a personal level, there are also many individuals whom I would like to thank for helping to make this thesis possible. In addition to friends who provided both support for my research and (at times) distractions, my extended family deserves thanks for their support. I am particularly indebted to my parents without whose support my thesis would never have become a reality. Throughout the process they continued to believe in my competence and were steadfast in their support. Others in the family, including my grandparents, also took an interest in my studies and provided support. I would also like to thank my family-through- marriage. They have contributed much more than simply providing me with places to stay in Finland (and Stockport) and the opportunity to use and improve my Finnish and Swedish language skills. They have welcomed me into the Alanko clan (despite my continued use of the Novack name) and given me a second family. Above all, however, I would like to acknowledge the constant support and encouragement provided by my husband Mika. Not only did he spend many days following me around Helsinki and Stockholm waiting in libraries or on park benches while I conducted interviews in ministries or met with academics. He also read many drafts of my thesis and stayed up with me to discuss my research on nights when I thought so much about my PhD that I could not fall asleep.