‘SocialEurope’ has always been hard to pin down. 1 Born as a putative counterweight to the market-making focus of the Single Europe Act, it was always diminished by the difficulty of refashioning a largely market-focused EU into an agent of social protection, and by the impossibility of genuinely pooling risks and resources between people of different countries (Greer and Sokol 2012 ). The result was that it was often misunderstood, with genuine accomplishments in areas from gender equality to working hours to infrastructure in peripheral Europe underrated
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 European Union after Brexit addresses the ways in which Brexit has changed and will change European Union politics: the forces, mechanisms and stakes of an unprecedented transformation of the European polity. How will the EU operate without one of its key diplomatic and international military partners? What will happen to its priorities, internal balance(s) of power, and legislation without the reliably liberal and Eurosceptic United Kingdom? What are the effects of the Brexit negotiations on the EU? In general, what happens when an ‘ever closer union’ founded on a virtuous circle of economic, social, and political integration is called into question? This book is largely positive about the future of the EU after Brexit, but it suggests that the process of European integration has gone into reverse, with Brexit coming amidst other developments that disrupt the optimistic trajectory of integration. Contributors focus on areas spanning foreign policy, political economy, public policy, and citizenship, with chapters covering topics such as international trade, the internal market, freedom of movement, the European legal system, networks, security relations, social Europe and the impact of Brexit on Central and Eastern Europe. Chapters are grounded in comparative politics, political economy, and institutionalist approaches to politics and economics.
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 ‘SocialEurope’, the
shifting amalgam of welfare states and EU social policy. Established integration
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 ‘SocialEurope’, the shifting amalgam of welfare
states and EU social policy
socialEurope, such as the European Pillar of Social Rights proclaimed in 2017 (Vandenbroucke 2018 ).
Another opportunity is that Brexit allows member state governments and EU institutions to clarify the relationship between national and EU citizenship, as suggested for example by greater coordination of naturalization policies. Indeed, as some legal scholars argue, Brexit puts EU citizens of exclusively UK nationality at risk of being stripped of their EU citizenship in a way that ‘might fall within the ambit of EU law’ (Mindus 2017 , 90), a conclusion consistent
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
In this broad sweep, Mayo explores dominant European discourses of higher education, in the contexts of different globalisations and neoliberalism, and examines its extension to a specific region. It explores alternatives in thinking and practice including those at the grassroots, also providing a situationally grounded project of university–community engagement. Signposts for further directions for higher education lifelong learning, with a social justice purpose, are provided.
Does European integration contribute to, or even accelerate, the erosion of intra-party democracy? This book is about improving our understanding of political parties as democratic organisations in the context of multi-level governance. It analyses the impact of European Union (EU) membership on power dynamics, focusing on the British Labour Party, the French Socialist Party (PS), and the German Social Democratic Party (SPD). The purpose of this book is to investigate who within the three parties determines EU policies and selects EU specialists, such as the candidates for European parliamentary elections and EU spokespersons. The book utilises a principal-agent framework to investigate the delegation of power inside the three parties across multiple levels and faces. It draws on over 65 original interviews with EU experts from the three national parties and the Party of European Socialists (PES) and an e-mail questionnaire. This book reveals that European policy has largely remained in the hands of the party leadership. Its findings suggest that the party grassroots are interested in EU affairs, but that interest rarely translates into influence, as information asymmetry between the grassroots and the party leadership makes it very difficult for local activists to scrutinise elected politicians and to come up with their own policy proposals. As regards the selection of EU specialists, such as candidates for the European parliamentary elections, this book highlights that the parties’ processes are highly political, often informal, and in some cases, undemocratic.
given policy; one would need to investigate its distributive implications. This alternative framework for EU policy making would render unsustainable the view that the EU is only an economic association. Thirdly, a socialEurope of this sort would be incompatible with the conception of an EU at two (or more) speeds. The idea of leaving the distressed member states behind goes against the principles of democratic citizenship and reciprocity advocated in the previous chapters. Crucially, it is inconsistent with the background of shared political and economic