Integration Theory I

1
Integration Theory I

• Interdependence, Legalism, Neo-federalism, LI

2
Interdependence/regime theory (Keohane and Nye)

• Keohane and Nye (1977) criticized contentions
  about the loss of state power due to advances in
  information technology and dissemination.
• Realist assumptions about world politics need to
  be supplemented in order to get a full view of
  reality.

3
Interdependence/regime theory (Keohane and Nye)

• The state is not the only important unit, and
  there are many channels that connect societies.
• There isnt a hierarchy among issues, thus it is
  more difficult to distinguish between domestic
  and foreign policy.
• Military force is not used by governments towards
  other governments within the region, or on the
  issues, when complex interdependence prevails.

4
Interdependence/regime theory (Keohane and Nye)

• Multiple channels prescribe a different role for
  international organizations.
• Cooperation between member states in an
  interdependent world is unavoidable, membership
  in international regimes may help minimize the
  uncertainties for nation states in international
  collaboration.
• Recurrent interactions can change the perceptions
  of participants about their interests.

5
Legalism or Integration through Law

• The study of European institutions needed to be
  supplemented by an examination of the role of the
  Court of Justice and of the impact of European
  law on the process of integration.
• Weiler (1982) study of the ECJ in the
  integration process (the only EU institution
  active in promoting integration through its
  activism in the 1960s and 70s).

6
Neo-Federalism (Pinder)

• Developed in the mid 1980s, returns to the basic
  premises of the original federalists of the post
  war years.
• John Pinder incorporate the federalist goal, but
  also a more practical approach to achieving those
  goals.
• Neo-federalism allowed for federalism to be
  achieved through incremental stages without the
  need for a big bang.

7
Neo-Federalism (Pinder)

• Incremental federalism consisted of small steps
  toward an increasingly federalist goal.
• Criticizes neo-functionalism for ignoring the
  crucial role of the State and national leaders in
  the integration process.
• Criticizes traditional federalism for its all or
  nothing approach to the creation of a federal
  Europe.

8
Neo-Federalism (Pinder)

• The act of constitution building and the
  possibility that it occurs not in a single simple
  act (occurring all at once).
• Neo-federalism focuses on the federalizing
  process and does not treat it as a single
  solitary moment of decisive action.
• When, why and how supranational institutions
  begin to take on federalist characteristics.

9
Neo-Federalism (Pinder)

• Focus is on powers of a smaller scope than the
  original federalists, not requiring whole new
  constitutions (just the will of political
  leaders).
• The focus is on what impacts the will of
  political leaders (parity, economic
  inter-dependence, demands from a social Europe).

10
The Relaunch of integration theory

• 1992 Recasting the European Bargain, Sandholtz
  and Zysman the Commission played a crucial
  leadership role acting as a policy entrepreneur
  (SEA), aided by a transnational industry
  coalition which was in favor of the single
  market.
• Changing international conditions the rise of
  Japan, the relative decline of the US and the
  evident failure of existing national economic
  policies in Europe- were the very events which
  made 1992 possible.

11
Liberal Intergovernmentalism (Moravscik)

• Andrew Moravscik European integration was a
  series of rational adaptations by national
  leaders to constraints and opportunities
• the evolution of an interdependent world,
• the relative power of states in the international
  system,
• the potential for international institutions to
  bolster credibility in interstate commerce.

12
Liberal Intergovernmentalism (Moravscik)

• Since its inception the EC has been based on
  interstate bargains between its leading member
  states.
• Heads of government backed by small groups of
  ministers and advisors initiate and negotiate
  major initiatives in the council of Ministers or
  in the European Council.
• Each Government views the EC through the lens of
  its own policy preferences. EC politics is the
  continuation of national politics and national
  policies by other means.

13
Liberal Intergovernmentalism (Moravscik)

• Three central tenets as an explanation for the
  process of European integration
• patterns of commercial advantage (national
  preferences) the preferences of nation-states
  are best explained by economic interests.
• relative bargaining power (interstate
  bargaining) the outcome of interstate bargains
  is best explained by the relative power of the
  states involved, or by patterns of asymmetrical
  interdependence.

14
Liberal Intergovernmentalism (Moravscik)

• incentives to enhance credibility of interstate
  commitments (institutional choice) the decision
  to delegate powers to the EU institutions was
  made because it was the most effective way of
  ensuring the credibility of commitments from
  other member states.
• All of the focus is on the political leaders and
  national interests of the member states.
  Self-interest still remains the motivating
  factor, but the focus is on completely different
  actors.

15
Liberal Intergovernmentalism (Moravscik)

• Moravcsik adds that state behavior reflects the
  rational actions of governments constrained at
  home by domestic societal forces, and abroad by
  their strategic environment.
• The underlying desire of member states and
  national leaders to protect national sovereignty
  is paramount, but not problematized i.e. it is
  just assumed.

16
Liberal Intergovernmentalism (Moravscik)

• Problems assumption that the institutions
  created by the integration process will always
  loyally serve the interests of those that
  originally created them.
• No independent identity or interests on the part
  of the various institutions (or the people who
  serve in them).
• The day-to day activities of the institutions of
  the European Communities (EU) are ignored.

17
Questions

• Mention examples of the ability of
  neo-functionalism to explain European
  integration. Same for Functionalism,
  Intergovernmentalism, LI, Realism,
  Interdependence theory,
• Euro-lobbyists Formalized European level actors
  pushing for their interests (sounds
  like__________________)
• Institutions various institutions have mobilized
  and pressed for greater integration through
  increases in their own powers (EP) or the
  creation of new institutions like the Ombudsman
  or Committee of the Regions (sounds
  like________________)
• External factors Obviously affected the original
  creation of the communities both in 1952 and in
  1957, but also influences later steps (both
  positive and negative). (sounds
  like________________).
• National leaders during critical moments like
  the development of the various treaties national
  leaders, their individual goals, priorities and
  personalities can very much shape EU development
  (sounds like________________)