Constructivist Approaches and Multi-Level Governance in European Integration
Constructivist Approaches
1. What is the basic nature of the EU/the integration process?
Constructivists claim that social ideas and discourses matter for European integration.
2. Which is the dependent variable (object of study) in a constructivist approach?
The dependent variable is ideas and discourses. On the one hand, they are considered relevant in their own right. They constitute important explananda or “dependent variables” neglected in rationalist accounts.
3. Which are the independent variables (explanatory factors) in a constructivist approach?
Ideas and discourses are “independent variables”, without which we cannot explain important outcomes of European integration and EU politics.
4. What is the logic of appropriateness?
It says that actors do not judge alternative courses of action by the consequences for their own utility but by their conformity to norms, rules and identities, or by the validity of the arguments made in their favor.
5. Which are the three focus areas of constructivist approaches to European integration? Which are their main arguments?
The first one is focused on the effects of ideas and discourses on integration preferences. The second asks how the intersubjective context of negotiations and decision-making in the EU affects integration outcomes. Finally, constructivists are interested in the effects of European integration and institutions on community building.
The main assumption of the first research focus is that institutional integration depends on the strength of the transnational community: the stronger the collective, “European” identity and the larger the pool of common compatible beliefs and meanings, the more institutional integration we will see. By contrast, weak European and strong national identities generate resistance to institutional integration, and without shared normative and causal beliefs, common institutions and integrated policies are hard to agree on.
The other two perspectives start from the assumption that institutional integration promotes community building and take up neo-functionalist expectations of upgrading the common interest, actor socialization, and shifting identities and loyalties.
6. Which are the scope conditions that increase the likelihood of social learning processes to occur?
- Actors face novel situations characterized by high uncertainty.
- A socializing agent possesses the authority to act on behalf of a community with which a particular actor identifies.
- Socialization concerns norms and rules which enjoy high legitimacy in the community.
- It takes place in an environment corresponding to an “ideal speech situation” which encourages deliberation and is characterized by the absence of external and political constraints.
- The domestic or societal resonance of EU ideas is high.
7. Will socialization processes lead to “ever closer union” or political unity in Europe?
In the longer run, this socialization process may generate momentum in favor of further integration, but constructivist theories are not generally optimistic about “ever closer union”. As a research program, constructivism is open to potential transformative effects of integration on identities, norms, and preferences and rejects the rationalist assumption of exogenously given preferences. But the theorized conditions of such transformative effects may simply not obtain in the EU. Because identities and structures of meaning may be less compatible and more durable than the interests of EU governments, constructivists may even come to more pessimistic conclusions about the prospects of European integration than intergovernmentalists.
8. Which are the “thin” and “thick” European identities?
Thin: Requires identification with abstract transnational values and norms.
Thick: Resembles national identities in being based on group identification.
9. Which is the main argument of Parsons?
He shows that the supranational ideas of entrepreneurial French leaders brought about a supranational institutional model of European integration in the face of more intergovernmental alternatives and that these ideas cannot be reduced to structural economic or political factors. Because French preferences were decisive at the early stage of European integration, and because these early institutional choices shaped its subsequent institutional development, Parsons can indeed claim that the “origins of the EU” were ideational. He also argues that the presence of a community-minded leadership of the 1950s cannot be explained by deeper beliefs, cleavages, or membership in parties or other organizations. These leaders were able to stand up against alternative visions of Europe not because they persuaded their proponents or obtained an electoral mandate for the community model but because they gained the power for completely unrelated reasons.
10. Which is Wæver’s main argument?
In his view, national discourses and visions are not, and do not need to be, replaced by a harmonized European vision. For stable integration, it is sufficient if these visions are compatible and include the European project as a part of national identity. This view corresponds to the relevance of inclusive identities stressed in public opinion research.
11. Which is Gstöhl’s main argument?
He argues that the reluctance of Scandinavian countries and Switzerland to join the EU cannot be adequately explained by economic costs and benefits alone but must additionally be attributed to ideational and institutional constraints – such as traditions of neutrality and direct democracy or ethno-linguistic cleavages in the Swiss case.
12. What is the “rhetorical entrapment” referred to in the text?
It refers to ideational effects on negotiations and their outcomes, giving the example of the studies of enlargement (A large number of EEC member states favored giving Franco’s Spain membership while they were invoking the liberal-democratic (and anti-fascist) identity of the Community).
13. Does the integration process impact the identities and ideas of individuals and political parties?
There is no evidence for a shift of mass loyalties and change of identities. Surveys show that national identities and allegiances clearly predominate in the European Union.
14. Where does this leave the neo-functionalist argument about political spill-over?
As expected by neo-functionalism, mass attitudes toward European integration have indeed become more politicized during this period. But rather than strengthening European identity and loyalty, politicization has ended up undermining the “permissive consensus” on European integration, reasserting territorial and national identities and divisions, and has led to the proliferation of Euro-skeptic parties.
15. What is the explanation for the little impact of European integration on identity transformation?
Weak socialization effects of European integration are confirmed by studies on the preferences and identities of various types of political and administrative actors. The “ideas of Europe” of the major parties in the major member states have remained remarkably stable over the decades. National bureaucrats involved in Commission and Council committees do develop expanded role conceptions, but their primary allegiance remains with their state of origin.
16. How is liberal intergovernmentalism criticized from a constructivist perspective?
At the domestic level, and because it assumes that European integration is mainly driven by economic interest groups, liberal intergovernmentalism downplays the impact of national identities and constitutional ideas. Adding identity to the picture shows that the prospects of European integration are more limited domestically than liberal intergovernmentalism assumes.
Multi-Level Governance
17. Which is the dependent variable (object of study)?
It explains the day-to-day workings of European integration and the EU.
18. Which are the important actors?
Europe’s sub-national and supra-national bodies.
19. What does MLG share with neo-functionalism?
It shares a similar worldview with neo-functionalism, from which it can be claimed to have evolved. Some have taken the point even further, arguing that MLG is identical to neo-functionalism in the hypotheses it generates because it is nothing more than a partial restatement of neo-functionalism without the functionalism.
20. What is the basic view of the EU of MLG scholars?
They saw it as a political system, defying the traditional separation between international and domestic; it challenges standard state-centric, comparative politics conceptualization.
21. What is a constraining dissensus?
This “dissensus” operates as a domestic constraint on the kind of deals elites can make to solve EU policy problems, thereby adding an extra complication to the tension between elected and unelected institutions.
22. What does the focus on governance instead of government mean?
Governance implies a shift from the institution to the process, from the state authority and government resources to the coordinated collective action and “governing activities of social, political and administrative actors” and the sharing of tasks and responsibilities between public and private actors, guiding and steering in a more or less continuous process of interaction.
23. What is the open method of coordination?
The OMC is based on intergovernmental voluntary compliance with goals, benchmarking-driven mutual adjustment without the application of formal power.
24. Which are the main criticisms of the MLG approach?
- The theoretical potency and scope of MLG have been seriously questioned. MLG scholars have been criticized for offering more of a concept than a theory.
- Another line of criticism has argued that MLG focuses excessively on sub-national authorities at the expense of other actors.
- It tends to underplay the renationalization of policy.
- MLG raises important normative issues. Positive side: It is the brainchild of dissatisfaction with hierarchical policy-making authority and the monopoly of power by central governments. Negative side: With its spatial diffusion of power and control, MLG makes political legitimacy and accountability harder to pursue.
Region-Building and Regionalism
25. How is the process of region-building defined in the text? What is your assessment of this definition? How is it different from the point of view expressed by Telò (session 2 on regionalism)?
The phenomenon under study is a moving target, which was initially dominated by uni-dimensional organizations and now includes multi-dimensional organizations and less formally institutionalized networks. *(Further assessment and comparison with Telò’s viewpoint require context from session 2 on regionalism.)*
26. Which different kinds of regional cooperation mechanisms are identified in the text? To what extent is the typology useful?
Uni-dimensional cooperative mechanisms encompass sectoral or security organizations, but also economic integration arrangements or regional development banks, who promote research, public and private partnerships, and civil society networks.
Multi-dimensional cooperative networks are more comprehensive organizations, such as river basin organizations, UN Economic Commissions, etc. These networks cause bigger growth by sometimes even cross-border micro-regional organizations and creating development corridors.
*(The usefulness of the typology depends on the specific research question and context.)*
27. Which is the argument for conceptual pluralism in the definition of the concept of “region”? Which essential characteristics should be kept in mind?
As regionalism is changing over time, more and more characteristics must be taken into account, and the definition needs to encompass them all or be simple and broad enough to describe all regionalism cases happening worldwide. Different definitions are possible as some characteristics can be given more or less importance depending on the author. The links between states, mutual interdependence, a non-sovereign governance system, a regional identity, capacity to interact with other regions, influence, etc., must always be taken into account.
28. Which definition of region does the author propose? What do you think of this definition?
A space, different from the global, the national, or the local, created by actors to govern their behavior and transactions. *(This definition is broad, which can be both a strength and a weakness depending on the research context.)*
29. Which are the seven characteristics of regions? Which conception of “region” do they lead to?
- The boundaries (as limitations of reach in the real world), that can be open (porous) or closed.
- Density of within-region transactions.
- Use of actors of the regional construction to govern their extra-regional transactions.
- Variable roles of relative importance of the different types of actors.
- Light or heavy/ shallow or deep/ important or not/ formal or informal/ institutionalized or not/micro or macro-level/ old or new… regions.
- Regions as continuous phenomena constituted by more or less regionness.
These seven characteristics lead to a very varied and complete conception of a region.
30. Which is the paradox of regional integration from an academic disciplinary standpoint?
It explains that when some states enter a process of regionalization, different tools are needed to analyze the phenomenon to understand what is happening. But if the deepening of the process consists of acquiring statehood properties, at the end of the process, the region comes closer to a state model and can again be studied as a state.
31. Which are the four additional issues that the author identifies as objects of debate when analyzing regions?
Additivity, the overlapping regions, and the derived dynamic regional concepts, apart from the explained paradox.
Additivity: We tend to focus on a regional layer rather than on the other layers below. For certain purposes, it makes sense, but not for others. We should analyze the region as the sum of regional organizations and its constituent parts for a more complete and logical study of the state relations and regions.
Overlapping regions: Regions usually overlap with other regions since membership or belonging is usually not exclusive. This makes it difficult for empirical research and questions the applicability of comparative politics approaches when the overlapping is not a real issue.
Derived dynamic region concepts: Created once a region has been defined, when a non-region transforms into a region, when there is a process of increasing regional, etc. These dynamic concepts include regional cooperation and regional integration, which are associated with the old approaches and also regionalization and regionalism, associated with new approaches.
32. How are the concepts of regionalism, regionalization, and regional integration distinguished?
Regionalism: Represents the policy and project, whereby state and non-state actors cooperate and coordinate strategy within a particular region or as a type of world order. Often associated with a formal program and leads to institution building.
Regionalization: Refers to the process of cooperation, integration, cohesion, and identity creating a regional space.
Regional integration: Traditionally refers to European-style institutionalized economic and political regionalization but is also used synonymously with both terms (sum of them) explained before: regionalism and regionalization.
33. Which are the differences between independent, intermediate, and dependent variables? How could a research project focused on regions look?
Dependent variable: Something that depends on other factors. Usually, when you are looking for a relationship between two things, you are trying to find out what makes the dependent variable change the way it does.
Independent variable: A variable that stands alone and isn’t changed by the other variables you are trying to measure. When you are looking for some kind of relationship between variables, you are trying to see if the independent variable causes some kind of change in the other variables or dependent variables.
Intermediate variable: In between both and explains the dependent variable while being explained by other variables simultaneously.
*(A research project focused on regions would likely be complex and require careful consideration of the chosen variables and their relationships.)*
34. Which are the functions of theory when comparing regions?
The theoretical framework explains the purpose of the comparison and suggests how variables intervene and how they are interconnected, while the empirical tools and techniques allow us to test the theoretical hypotheses using empirical data. These theories allow us to distinguish between relevant and irrelevant observations and variables and suggest relations between the variables.