INTRODUCTION TO
EUROPEAN POLITICS
Dr Simona Guerra
simona.guerra@nottingham.ac.uk
EUROPEANISATION






Definition (key concepts and terms)
Europeanisation as process (institutions)
Europeanisation as governance
Europeanisation as discourse
Europeanisation and theories
Europeanisation (examples: parties and
party systems)
 A difficult concept: conclusions
EUROPEANISATION
A DEFINITION
‘Processes of (a) construction, (b)
diffusion and (c) institutionalisation of
formal and informal rules, procedures,
policy paradigms, styles, ‘ways of doing
things’ and shared beliefs and norms
which are first defined and consolidated in
the EU policy process and then
incorporated in the logic of domestic
discourse, identities, political structures
and public policies’ (Radaelli 2003)
EUROPEANISATION:
WHAT
 Geographical Europe? – changes in the external borders,
EU enlargements
 Developing institutions at the European level
 Central penetration of national systems of governance
 Exporting forms of political organisations (third actors)
 A political (stronger) unification project (Olsen 2002)
Institutionalist approach:
 Changes in political organisation: organisational/financial
capacity for common action and governance
 Changes in structures of meaning and people’s minds
WHY (NEW)
INSTITUTIONALISM
‘Institutionalism’s predominance arises because
Europeanisation is normally understood as
entailing a domestic adjustment process, and
member state institutions are typically seen as
amongst the intermediating variables in this
process’
‘Europeanisation as a process arising from some
kind of ‘misfit’ with the policies and practices of the
EU (see Börzel 1999; Risse et al. 2001)’ in Bulmer
and Burch 2005
‘Europeanisation is mostly interested in
adaptation to Europe’ (Radaelli 2004)
HOW
 Adaptational pressure (created by
misfit between the EU and MSs) and
proceeds through two different possible
pathways.
OR EUROPEANISATION
AS GOVERNANCE
 Does Europeanisation produce good and
legitimate governance in Europe?
- We studied it last week, is it more successful in CEE (democratic)?
 Does Europeanisation produce social policymaking capabilities at the domestic level without
compensating this with a model of ‘social
Europe’ to be delivered by EU institutions
(Scharpf 1999, 2001; Mair 2001:47)?
Radaelli 2004
OR EUROPEANISATION
AS DISCOURSE
 ‘Policy-makers and stakeholders construct
Europe through language and discourse’
 ‘Discourse can change the preferences of
actors, reformulate policy problems, make
a style more confrontational or more
cooperative, and can also increase or
decrease the value of resources (for
example by contesting the legitimacy of
corporate actors)’ (Radaelli 2004)
EUROPEANISATION
& THEORIES
 Europeanisation and EU integration
and theories (intergv’t or supranational/
governance turn)
 How does the EU interact with its MSs?
 Negative and positive integration (mutual
recognition, Cassis de Dijon case (1979)
CASSIS de DIJON CASE
 Two types of regulatory policies: Negative and positive
integration policies (Hix, 2005, pp. 239-260): Negative
integration: removal of barriers to international trade and
competition. Positive integration: establishment of new EUwide policies (Scharpf, 1996)

Cassis de Dijon case law (Case 120/78, 1979; on well-known spirits products, which cannot
be sold in the Federal Republic of Germany … the government of the Federal Republic of
Germany, …, put forward various arguments which, in its view, justify the application of
provisions relating to the minimum alcohol content of alcoholic beverages, adducing
considerations relating … the protection of public health and … to the protection of the
consumer against unfair commercial practices)
 (Nicolaidis, 2005), MR sets the conditions governing the
recognition
of
the
validity
of
foreign
laws/regulations/standards/certification procedures among
states so to assure host country regulatory officials and
citizens that the application of such foreign laws within their
borders is ‘compatible’ with their own – and incoming
products and services are safe
EUROPEANISATION:
PARTIES AND PARTY SYSTEMS
 Europe as an issue has not been
politicised for a long time
 Europe limits the degree of freedom of
political parties (implementing policies regulatory policies)
 Europe as a challenge? As a chance?
 Europe as a channel for Eurosceptic
parties?
EUROPEANISATION:
TIME AND SEQUENCE
1. There is Europeanisation when the logic of
domestic political actors changes. When the
logic of action and the logic of meaning are guided
by Europe. Think of Europe as the ‘grammar’ of
domestic political action
2. Europeanisation is change both in the sense of
responses to EU pressures and in the sense of
other usages of Europe which do not presuppose
pressure
3. Europeanisation is a process consisting of
complex sequences and time patterns’ (Radaelli
2004)
EUROPEANISATION
DEPENDing ON POLICIES
 Irondelle (2003) shows how French
military policy has become Europeanised
even if EU policies in this area have never
taken off
 First pillar (subject to supra-national
policy-making)
and
 Second and third pillar (security and
foreign policy CFSP, JHA) (IG)
EUROPEANISATION: A
DIFFICULT CONCEPT
 Examples of Europeanisation without major
adaptational pressure
 Domestic actors can use ‘Europe’ even in the
absence of pressure
 They can adapt domestic policy and produce change
independently of pressures arising out of institutional
misfit
LIMITS OF EXPLANATIONS
 ‘Goodness of fit’ as a too structural
approach (?)
 It can neglect the role of agency, that act
only in response to pressure
 Alternative explanatory approaches:
- Instead of separating the domains of policy,
politics, and polity (as Börzel and Risse do,
2003), one can investigate the dynamic
relations between policy change and macroinstitutional structures (Radaelli 2001)
ONLY EUROPEANISATION?
 We can address the question ‘how does one
know that change is correlated or caused by
Europeanisation, and not by other variables?’
 Other variables, like globalisation and
domestic politics, may matter more than
Europeanisation (Radaelli 2001)
EUROPEANISATION:
CONCLUSIONS
 Removing the confusion of up-loading and down-loading.
Europeanisation is both 'pressure' and 'usage‘
 Identification of research designs. Only bottom-up research
designs can inform on whether change is triggered by
pressure or usages
 Clarifying the distinction between EU policy and
Europeanisation. The latter does not presuppose
the former
 Clarifying the role of socialisation processes. Socialisation
is neither sufficient, nor necessary condition for
Europeanisation
REFERENCES

Bulmer, S. and Burch, M. (2005) ‘The Europeanization of UK Government:
From Quiet Revolution to Explicit Step-Change?, Public Administration,
Vol. 83, No. 4, pp. 861-890.

Featherstone, Kevin and Claudio Radaelli (eds) (2003). The Politics of
Europeanization. Oxford: OUP. [e-book] (especially Chapter 1 and
Chapter 3).

Hix, S. (2005), The Political System of the European Union, Basingstoke:
Palgrave Macmillan, 2nd ed.

Nicolaidis, K. (2005), ‘A World of Difference: Exploring the Dilemma of
Mutual Recognition’, Paper presented at Princeton, 17-19 February, draft
version.

Olsen, J. P. (2002) ‘The Many Faces of Europeanization’, Journal of
Common Market Studies, Vol. 40, No. 5, pp. 921-952.

Quaglia, L. et al. (2007) ‘Europeanization’ in M. Cini (ed) European Union
Politics, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2nd ed., pp.405-420.

Radaelli, C. (2004) ‘Europeanization: Solution or Problem? European
integration
online
papers,
Vol
8
available
at
http://eiop.or.at/eiop/texte/2004-016a.htm