European integration theories
Functionalism: it starts from the premises that by promoting cooperation
among states it may be possible to deter them from settling disputes over
competition for scarce resources aggressively. The logic behind it is to prevent
war
Neofunctionalism: this theory has a common starting point with functionalists
in their attachment to the collective pursuit of mutually beneficial goals leading
to enhanced economic prosperity. It is said to be a process based on spill-over.
Liberal intergovernmentalism: it claims that states rather than supranational
institutions are the key actors in the integration process, seeking essentially to
pursue their own respective preferences and to protect their sphere of power.
Multi-level governance: rather than focussing debate principally on whether it
is member state governments or europe’s supranational institutions that drive
the integration process, increased attention has been paid to the wide range of
actors and institutions involved at different levels in law making and policy
making within the European union.
Historical overview:
The hague convention 1948, this lead to the Council of Europe in 1949
o ECHR signed in 1950, came into force in 1953
Schuman+ Monnet, ECSC, 1951
o Pooling of Franco-German coal and steel resources under a high authority
with the option for other European States to participate. Four institutions
were set up:
High authority
Assembly
A council
Court of justice
A conference of foreign ministers of the six states in messina in Italy in 1955
generated agreement on moving in the direction of economic integration. A
committee chaired by Paul Henri spaak published in 1956 its report, which
contained the basic plan for Euratom and the EEC
The primary treaty objectives were to establish a common market, to
approximate the economic policies of the member states, to promote harmonious
development of economic activities throughout the community, to increase
stability and raise the standard of living, and to promote closer relations between
the member states. Barriers to trade were to be abolished and common
customs tariff was to be set up.
The Luxembourg accords
In 1965, when the time came under the transitional provisions of the treaty for the
council of ministers to move from unanimous to QMV. De gaulle objected to this. He
strenuously objected to the federalist logic of the proposal and, after a failure to reach a
compromise in the council, france refused to attend further council meetings and
adopted what became known as the empty chair policy. This lasted for 7 months, from
june 1965 until January 1966, after which a settlement was reached, which became
known as the Luxembourg compromise or the Luxembourg accords. These accords had
a considerable impact on community development over the next two decades. They
were essentially an agreement to disagree over voting methods in the council. The
, French asserted that even in cases where the treaty provided for majority decision-
making, discussion must continue until unanimity was reached whenever important
national interests were at stake. Recourse to QMV became the exception rather than the
norm. the Luxembourg accords enhanced member state power by according states
a de facto veto, which even if it was exercised cast a shadow over council
deliberations and impacted on the resulting community legislation. The period
between the EEC treaty and the SEA also saw other developments that enhanced
member sates powers over decision making.
In 1974 the European council was established to regularize the practice of
holding summits. It represented a weakening in the supranational elements of
the community
EP direct elections
In 1976 direct elections to the EP were finally agreed by the MS, and the first elections
took place in 1979. This event should have been a significant development for the
community, since the parliament became the first community institution with a direct
democratic mandate of sorts, but the elections were not an unqualified success. The
equivocal impact of EP direct elections was further underlined because its only role in
the legislative process was a right to be consulted when a specific treaty article so
provided. The supranational dimension to the community was more unequivocally
enhanced by developments relating to resources and the budget. In 1969 agreement
was reached on funding from the community’s own resources rather than from national
contributions, and on the expansion of the parliament’s role in the budgetary process.
The SEA
Notwithstanding the countervailing tendencies described in the previous section, the
1960s and 70s were often referred to as a period of political stagnation or malaise in the
community, with the commission having considerable difficulty in securing Council
agreement to its proposals. The result was that the attainment of the was often
significantly delayed.
After the fontaineblue European council summit of 1984, two committees were
established to consider treaty revision and political integration of which the Dooge
committee is important for this story. Although it was not acted on, the European
council in Milan of 1985 agreed, by voting according to QMV, to convene an
intergovernmental conference. This lead to the SEA. In 1985 Lord Cockfield drew up on
behalf of the commission a precise timetable for the completion of the internal market,
known as the white paper, setting out a long list of the barriers to be removed before a
deadline of 1992. The SEA represented a political commitment to this deadline by the
member states.
Changes by the SEA
Institutional changesThe EP’s power in the legislative process was enhanced+
it was given a veto over accession of new member states and the conclusion of
agreements with associate states.
Substantive changes
o Article 18 EC set out the internal market aim of progressively establishing
the internal market over a period expiring on 31 december 1992 and
defined the internal market as an area without internal frontiers in which
the free movement of goods, persons, services and capital is ensured.
Functionalism: it starts from the premises that by promoting cooperation
among states it may be possible to deter them from settling disputes over
competition for scarce resources aggressively. The logic behind it is to prevent
war
Neofunctionalism: this theory has a common starting point with functionalists
in their attachment to the collective pursuit of mutually beneficial goals leading
to enhanced economic prosperity. It is said to be a process based on spill-over.
Liberal intergovernmentalism: it claims that states rather than supranational
institutions are the key actors in the integration process, seeking essentially to
pursue their own respective preferences and to protect their sphere of power.
Multi-level governance: rather than focussing debate principally on whether it
is member state governments or europe’s supranational institutions that drive
the integration process, increased attention has been paid to the wide range of
actors and institutions involved at different levels in law making and policy
making within the European union.
Historical overview:
The hague convention 1948, this lead to the Council of Europe in 1949
o ECHR signed in 1950, came into force in 1953
Schuman+ Monnet, ECSC, 1951
o Pooling of Franco-German coal and steel resources under a high authority
with the option for other European States to participate. Four institutions
were set up:
High authority
Assembly
A council
Court of justice
A conference of foreign ministers of the six states in messina in Italy in 1955
generated agreement on moving in the direction of economic integration. A
committee chaired by Paul Henri spaak published in 1956 its report, which
contained the basic plan for Euratom and the EEC
The primary treaty objectives were to establish a common market, to
approximate the economic policies of the member states, to promote harmonious
development of economic activities throughout the community, to increase
stability and raise the standard of living, and to promote closer relations between
the member states. Barriers to trade were to be abolished and common
customs tariff was to be set up.
The Luxembourg accords
In 1965, when the time came under the transitional provisions of the treaty for the
council of ministers to move from unanimous to QMV. De gaulle objected to this. He
strenuously objected to the federalist logic of the proposal and, after a failure to reach a
compromise in the council, france refused to attend further council meetings and
adopted what became known as the empty chair policy. This lasted for 7 months, from
june 1965 until January 1966, after which a settlement was reached, which became
known as the Luxembourg compromise or the Luxembourg accords. These accords had
a considerable impact on community development over the next two decades. They
were essentially an agreement to disagree over voting methods in the council. The
, French asserted that even in cases where the treaty provided for majority decision-
making, discussion must continue until unanimity was reached whenever important
national interests were at stake. Recourse to QMV became the exception rather than the
norm. the Luxembourg accords enhanced member state power by according states
a de facto veto, which even if it was exercised cast a shadow over council
deliberations and impacted on the resulting community legislation. The period
between the EEC treaty and the SEA also saw other developments that enhanced
member sates powers over decision making.
In 1974 the European council was established to regularize the practice of
holding summits. It represented a weakening in the supranational elements of
the community
EP direct elections
In 1976 direct elections to the EP were finally agreed by the MS, and the first elections
took place in 1979. This event should have been a significant development for the
community, since the parliament became the first community institution with a direct
democratic mandate of sorts, but the elections were not an unqualified success. The
equivocal impact of EP direct elections was further underlined because its only role in
the legislative process was a right to be consulted when a specific treaty article so
provided. The supranational dimension to the community was more unequivocally
enhanced by developments relating to resources and the budget. In 1969 agreement
was reached on funding from the community’s own resources rather than from national
contributions, and on the expansion of the parliament’s role in the budgetary process.
The SEA
Notwithstanding the countervailing tendencies described in the previous section, the
1960s and 70s were often referred to as a period of political stagnation or malaise in the
community, with the commission having considerable difficulty in securing Council
agreement to its proposals. The result was that the attainment of the was often
significantly delayed.
After the fontaineblue European council summit of 1984, two committees were
established to consider treaty revision and political integration of which the Dooge
committee is important for this story. Although it was not acted on, the European
council in Milan of 1985 agreed, by voting according to QMV, to convene an
intergovernmental conference. This lead to the SEA. In 1985 Lord Cockfield drew up on
behalf of the commission a precise timetable for the completion of the internal market,
known as the white paper, setting out a long list of the barriers to be removed before a
deadline of 1992. The SEA represented a political commitment to this deadline by the
member states.
Changes by the SEA
Institutional changesThe EP’s power in the legislative process was enhanced+
it was given a veto over accession of new member states and the conclusion of
agreements with associate states.
Substantive changes
o Article 18 EC set out the internal market aim of progressively establishing
the internal market over a period expiring on 31 december 1992 and
defined the internal market as an area without internal frontiers in which
the free movement of goods, persons, services and capital is ensured.
