Social Protection: Why the EU Needs to Deliver

Conventional wisdom in European studies has long held that social policy is not anarea in which the European Union can make a large difference. Solidarity, it is said, can onlydevelop in societies where clear boundaries exist between individuals. Such is not the casein the EU, where a citizen’s primary allegiance is to his own country. Redistribution being azero-sum game, the majority method of decision-making is required, which may only beviable if the legitimacy of central institutions is clearly established. The legitimacy of the EUinstitutions, however, is said to be weak. In addition, a number of different traditions ofwelfare protection co-exist within the EU, as has been stressed by Gösta Esping-Andersen(1990). Citizens are strongly attached to their national brand of protection: in severalcountries, this is even regarded as a key element of national identity. The history ofEuropean integration has done little to belie these views. Social policy has experiencedrelatively modest progress, and the difficulties inherent in the adoption of European financialperspectives, undermined by the evils of juste retour have shown that redistribution andunanimity are indeed at odds. This contribution purports to examine the problem from a uniquely differentperspective. It does not start by taking an ontological view of Europe, in which the EU’sactivities are determined by reference to what Europe is. Nor does it rest on any normativeviews. Instead, it presents evidence demonstrating that European citizens are becomingincreasingly aware of their standards of living and worried about their children’s future, andthat these sentiments nurture a political protest that is a potential source of instability for theEU unless met by an adequate political response.social policy; welfare state; democracy; public opinion

Fédéralisme, asymétrie et interdépendance : aux origines de l’action internationale des composantes de l’État fédéral

This article deals with a problem relatively neglected by studies devoted to the foreign relations of federated states, namely the reasons that impel the member Itates of some federations to develop foreign affairs policy independently of each other. Several types of factors are taken into consideration. It appears that the growing interdependence of industrialized countries leads to both an increase and a diversification of international contacts between public authorities, thus undermining he traditional monopoly held by external affairs departments. This phenomenon, however, does not arise to the same degree in all federations, suggesting that internal factors may equally play a major role. The composite character and above all the asymmetry of some federations have, clearly enough, centrifugal effects. But the influence of institutional variables must not be neglected: the combination of a particularly pronounced asymmetry together with weaknesses n the representation accorded at the national level to different regions making up the federation probably explain the activism shown by Belgium's linguistic communities and some Canadian provinces

Social protection

Conventional wisdom in European studies has long held that social policy is not an area in which the European Union can make a large difference. Solidarity, it is said, can only develop in societies where clear boundaries exist between individuals. Such is not the case in the EU, where a citizen’s primary allegiance is to his own country. Redistribution being a zero-sum game, the majority method of decision-making is required, which may only be viable if the legitimacy of central institutions is clearly established. The legitimacy of the EU institutions, however, is said to be weak. In addition, a number of different traditions of welfare protection co-exist within the EU, as has been stressed by Gösta Esping-Andersen (1990). Citizens are strongly attached to their national brand of protection: in several countries, this is even regarded as a key element of national identity. The history of European integration has done little to belie these views. Social policy has experienced relatively modest progress, and the difficulties inherent in the adoption of European financial perspectives, undermined by the evils of “juste retour” have shown that redistribution and unanimity are indeed at odds (...)

The Unmaking of a Constitution: Lessons from the European Referenda

The reference to a so-called “European Constitution” rendered recourse to referenda practically inevitable. Because it suggests a radical departure from the past, the term would inevitably affect how the constitutional treaty would be ratified. In a number of countries, the modifications of European treaties must in any case be submitted to a popular vote. In France, the idea of a referendum advanced by a number of personalities such as the president of the European Convention, Valéry Giscard d’Estaing, received the approval of leaders of all political groups consulted by the President of the Republic. Jacques Chirac underscored that it was “logical” to consult the people on the future of European institutions. In a period in which distrust in the political class is considerable, opposition to popular consultation risked accusations of elitist arrogance, which no political leader could get away with easily (...)

Europe at the polls. Lessons from the 2013 Italian elections

The 2013 Italian elections were in several respects a ‘Europeanised’ contest. As a severe institutional crisis unfolded, political parties paid great attention to European issues, broadly defined, and a ‘European-level party’, the European People’s Party (EPP), made an unprecedented attempt to shape the outcome. The election results must therefore be analysed in relation to Europe. Negative aspects appear to have prevailed in both the discourse of parties and the choices of voters. In terms of policy, Italians clearly rejected the fiscal austerity policy advocated by the European Union since the outbreak of the crisis. Regarding EU governance, the predominantly negative character of this Europeanisation process may be a source of instability in the future

The Politics of Delegation in the European Union

Delegation of powers to supranational institutions, once a hallmark of European integration, is increasingly contested by national leaders as well as by the public opinion. At the same time, recent developments suggest that in turbulent times, the technique remains widely used. This article purports to explain this apparent paradox. It proposes a reading of the principal-agent principles that takes into account specificities of the EU system, such as the absence of a strong centre of power or the significant degree of mistrust that may exist among national governments. It argues that the competition between multiple principals may ultimately result in different models of delegation.La délégation des pouvoirs à des institutions supranationales, qui était une caractéristique principale de l’intégration européenne, est de plus en plus contestée par les leaders nationaux ainsi que par l’opinion publique. Cependant, les évolutions récentes tendent à montrer que dans les périodes de crise actuelles, cette technique est encore largement utilisée. Cet article vise à expliquer ce paradoxe apparent. Il propose une lecture des principes du principal-agent qui prennent en compte les spécificités du système de l’UE, telles que l’absence d’un lieu de pouvoir fort ou la grande méfiance qui règne entre les gouvernements nationaux. Il soutient que la concurrence entre un grand nombre de « principaux » peut donner lieu à terme à différents modèles de délégation

Le pacte 'budgétaire' : incertitudes juridiques et ambiguïté politique

Quel regard portera-t-on dans vingt ans sur le projet de « traité sur la stabilité, la coordination et la gouvernance dans l’Union économique et monétaire »1, approuvé par les chefs d’État et de gouvernement le 31 janvier dernier ? À l’évidence, la réponse dépendra dans une large mesure des suites qui seront données à cette décision : le traité en question sera-t-il ratifié par un nombre suffisant de signataires pour entrer en vigueur ? (...)

The Making of a Transnational Constitution: An Institutionalist Perspective on the European Convention

No matter how one evaluates the product of its work, the Convention on the Future ofEurope has marked a turning point in the history of European integration. This article is divided into three parts. The first presents the different actors who participated in the Convention and the cleavages that existed within the assembly. The secondpart addresses the impact of these cleavages and the logics that shaped the final compromise.In the third part, we will attempt to analyze the respective importance of these variousdecision-making modes and the variables that determined their relative influence. Goingbeyond the classical opposition between deliberation and negotiation often used to describethe work of the Convention, we will argue that the choices made on the composition andfunctioning of the Convention had a strong influence on its work, and therefore, on thesubstance of the draft constitution.Constitution for Europe; European Convention

L’Europe politique a-t-elle encore un avenir ?

On ne peut présumer du jugement de l’histoire sur l’échec de la Constitution européenne. Si le verdict des urnes témoigne bien d’une grande perplexité à l’égard du présent et de l’avenir de la construction européenne, la demande d’une relance originale de l’intégration est également conséquente. Il est ainsi possible que la crise actuelle soit salvatrice pour la construction d’une Europe politique. Face aux inquiétudes des citoyens comme aux diverses réserves des gouvernements, la porte est cependant étroite. Chacun doit avoir conscience que le statu quo est intenable

L'Europe en zone de turbulences

Dossier consacré à la crise que traverse l'Union européenne depuis 2003 qui est due tant à des difficultés d'ordre interne à l'Union, qu'extérieures, mais que celle -ci n'arrive pas à surmonter. La pression extérieure accroît les risques d'implosion intérieure et l'élargissement a conduit à une dilution de la cohérence communautaire. La crise économique et financière a révélé l'effondrement des barrières protectrices et remis en cause un modèle européen qui constitutait un exemple. Seule la dimension juridique préserve la continuité de l'ensemble européen