At the heart of the European integration process is the political economy debate over whether the EU should be a market-making project, or if it should combine this with integration in employment and social policy. What has been the impact of the 2004 and 2007 rounds of enlargement upon the political economy of European integration? EU enlargement, the clash of capitalisms and the European social dimension analyses the impact of the 2004 and 2007 enlargements upon the politics of European integration within EU employment and social policy. This book analyses the main policy negotiations in the field and analyses the political positions and contributions of the Central and Eastern European Member States. Through an analyses of the negotiations of the Services Directive, the revision of the Working Time Directive and the Europe 2020 poverty target, the book argues that the addition of the Central and Eastern European states has strengthened liberal forces at the EU level and undermined integration with EU employment and social policy.
This highly original book constitutes one of the first attempts to examine the problem of distributive justice in the EU in a systematic manner. The author starts by arguing that the set of shared political institutions at EU level, including the European Parliament and the Court of Justice of the EU, generate democratic duties of redistribution amongst EU citizens. Furthermore, he claims that the economic structure of the EU, comprising a common market, a common currency, and a free-movement area, triggers duties of reciprocity amongst member states. He contends that the responsibilities to fulfil these duties should be shared by three levels of government – local, national, and supranational. More specifically, he argues that the EU should act as a safety net to the national welfare systems, applying the principle of subsidiarity. In turn, the common market and the Eurozone should balance efficiency targets with distributive concerns. Concrete policy proposals presented in this book include a threshold of basic goods for all EU citizens, an EU Labour Code, a minimum EU corporate tax rate, and an EU Fund for Global Competitiveness. These proposals are thoroughly examined from the standpoint of feasibility. The author argues that his proposals fit in the political culture of the member states, are economically feasible, can be translated into functioning institutions and policies, and are consistent with the limited degree of social solidarity in Europe. This book is a major contribution to the understanding of how a just Europe would look and what it takes to get us there.
The chapter then turns to politics, working through the consequences for the EUsocialpolicy of subtracting the UK. The loss of the UK is a blow to the northern/eastern liberal bloc in the EU, and will empower France. The consequences for social policy over time might be dramatic. Agenda-setting will change to reflect the new veto players, and what might have been non-decisions might become decisions. Blame-avoidance techniques will change without the UK around to attract blame for liberalization. This should shape the content of policy, not just to
-portrayed in quite deterministic terms as preconditions
for a European welfare regime. At the same time, calls for democratic participation were less
common than among members of the GUE-NGL; when ‘politicisation’ 15 or a ‘political Europe’ 16 were mentioned at all, the tone was traditionally social democratic and
productivist. Nevertheless, there was concern at the present condition of social Europe: as in
Leibfried’s work ( 2005 ; Leibfried and Pierson, 2000 ), this centred on the inadequacy of EUsocialpolicy as a response to the erosion of
EUsocialpolicy developments during the Great Recession fall into three key
areas: labour market regulations, pro-employment policies and anti-poverty initiatives. Each of these, however, have witnessed similar trends to those outlined
Towards a social democratic European Union?
above, with weak EU-level governance undermining the capacity for more substantive measures that might otherwise have a redistributive or decommodifying
In the area of labour market regulations, divisions between member states
have continued to limit
specific to EU juridification are identified.
Successive historical trajectories of continental juridification are then delineated. These are categorised in terms of the ‘neo-Latin’ ideal types developed
by Schmitter (1998b: 133–6), rather than Westphalian or imperial models
drawn from elsewhere;1 in Schimtter’s terminology, post-Maastricht juridification is found to correspond with the trajectory of condominio. Integration
theories such as neofunctionalism are considered in historical context in
these closing sections, as is EUsocialpolicy.
quite deterministic terms as preconditions for a European
welfare regime. At the same time, calls for democratic participation were less
common than among members of the GUE-NGL; when ‘politicisation’15 or a
‘political Europe’16 were mentioned at all, the tone was traditionally social
democratic and productivist. Nevertheless, there was concern at the present
condition of social Europe: as in Leibfried’s work (2005; Leibfried and
Pierson, 2000), this centred on the inadequacy of EUsocialpolicy as a
response to the erosion of the welfare state.
Taken together the GUE
-on’ or ‘after-thought’ to market
integration. There is no transnational European welfare state that either
complements or supersedes the social policies of its members. The EU has
developed more powers to regulate and coordinate social policy than the
redistributive policies found at the national level (Annesley, 2003;
Leibfried, 2010; Leibfried and Pierson, 1995). Of the handful of directives
that concern EUsocialpolicy, the majority have resulted from concerns
about preventing a distortion of competition within the Single European
Market (SEM) and relate to the
The EU can be thought of as an outcome of
juridification. Yet the concept must be adapted if it is to support more than metatheoretical
reflection on the integration process. If the aim is an empirical research programme, thought
must also be given to the interactions between national, subnational and supranational
contexts that distinguish EU juridification from that of the nation-state. In the case of this
study, attention is given to ‘Social Europe’, the shifting amalgam of welfare
states and EUsocialpolicy
German philosopher Jürgen Habermas has written extensively on the European Union.
This is the only in-depth account of his project. Published now in a second
edition to coincide with the celebration of his ninetieth birthday, a new
preface considers Habermas’s writings on the eurozone and refugee crises,
populism and Brexit, and the presidency of Emmanuel Macron. Placing an
emphasis on the conception of the EU that informs Habermas’s political
prescriptions, the book is divided into two main parts. The first considers the
unfolding of 'social modernity' at the level of the EU. Among the
subjects covered are Habermas's concept of juridification, the
latter's affinities with integration theories such as neofunctionalism, and
the application of Habermas's democratic theory to the EU. The second part
addresses 'cultural modernity' in Europe – 'Europessimism'
is argued to be a subset of the broader cultural pessimism that assailed the
project of modernity in the late twentieth century, and with renewed intensity
in the years since 9/11. Interdisciplinary in approach, this book engages
with European/EU studies, critical theory, political theory, international
relations, intellectual history, comparative literature, and philosophy. Concise
and clearly written, it will be of interest to students, scholars and
professionals with an interest in these disciplines, as well as to a broader
readership concerned with the future of Europe