Ever Closer Cooperation? The Limits of the ‘Norwegian Method’ of European Integration

The 'No' majorities in two referendums on European Community/Union (EC/EU) membership have set clear formal limits to Norway's participation in European integration. However, pro-EU parliamentary majorities have tended to produce governments that seek as close cooperation with the EU as possible. This involves a kind of quasi-membership of the EU, particularly in the light of cooperation beyond the limits of the European Economic Area (EEA). The result has been a 'Norwegian method' of European integration that combines access to the Single Market with efforts to 'purchase' participation in other policy areas and adapt to changing EU policies, legislation and treaties. Given the supranational character of the EU's Single Market rules, this kind of quasi-membership goes considerably further than non-members' participation in most other international organisations. Although the EEA system has worked to the parties' satisfaction, Norway's efforts to keep up with a changing Single Market, maintain the institutions in the face of treaty change and enlargement, and accommodate new developments pertaining to the EU's second and third pillars represent considerable challenges to the Norwegian method of integration.     

Codetermination and the market for corporate control in the European Community

In the process of European integration the member states have agreed to transfer substantial jurisdiction in the areas of economic and monetary policy to the European Community. In industrial relations, however, they have refused to make similar concessions. Despite its numerous attempts the Commission of the EC has not as yet been able to secure the political consensus necessary for a European model of employees' participation and codetermination. In the context of the Single European Market the national systems of codetermination are destined to play a decreasing role. With the continuing development of the single market and its interlocking business structures across national borders, regulations on codetermination that extend only up to such borders and no further can be expected to lose in significane. This paper traces the history of codetermination in the European Community. It also analyses the reasons why the various directives and regulations drafted by the EC Commission since 1967 have been rejected by the Council of Ministers.     

Atlantic capitalism versus Rhine capitalism in the European community

The advent of the Single European Market in 1993 has prompted a debate about the differences between the German social market economy and the British liberal market, and whether these can coexist. ‘Rhine Capitalism’ based on social solidarity will remain a source of competitive advantage through its emphasis on continuous development of labour skills and technology. Britain's ‘Atlantic Capitalism’ lacks such a framework for dialogue between government and producer interests, which will make the creation of a national competitiveness strategy to counter deindustrialisation problematic. At the European Community level, some regulatory framework similar to Germany's Ordnungspolitik will probably emerge to underpin the operation of the Single Market.     

The restructuring process in central and Eastern Europe: Business strategies for EC companies

The completion of the EC Single Market and the opening of Central and Eastern Europe constitute major changes in the European business environment which challenge companies to develop new business strategies. The Single Market will be one marketplace, but Central and Eastern Europe has to be treated completely differently, in some respects on a country‐by‐country basis. Based on personal interviews with Eastern European business people, this article describes and analyses the opportunities for EC companies. On the basis of this analysis a business strategy for Central and Eastern Europe is outlined.     

The social dimension of the Single European Market: National versus transnational regulation

Abstract. Labour market regulation in the 1980s was subject to transnational pressures for deregulation, especially in the form of 'flexibilisation'. The 'Single European Market' project (SEM) promises further development in this direction. At the same time, proposals for a 'Social Charter' are meant to introduce a European level of regulation to counteract the SEM's potential destabilizing consequences. However, regulatory disputes and pressures contrary to convergence are likely to be intensified by the SEM. Still further uncertainty will be created by changes in Eastern Europe, as well as by greater opportunities for cross-border production shifts. Neoliberal and neocorporatist variants of the 'competition state' will be increasingly at odds at both state and Community level, with the future of 'social Europe' at stake. To the extent that market integration means a globalisation of the European economy, it may effectively disintegrate its component parts, dividing those which have more solid foundations for growth - the well-regulated, high pay/high productivity areas - from those which do not. The market logic of the Single European Market programme will manifestly contradict the efforts of the Community to avoid this future.     

How the City of London lost at Brexit: a historical perspective

The nature of the City of London as an offshore financial centre has long made London dependent on the British state providing protection from external political regulation, even as London’s foreign currency business separated its interests from British governments’ economic policy preoccupations. Since the 2008 crash and the onset of the eurozone crisis, London has faced threats to both its autonomy from external regulatory demands and to its offshore business interests at the same time as the long-standing external statecraft of British governments around EU membership has broken down. The Cameron governments’ efforts to protect the City within the European Union under political conditions that were transformed by the eurozone crisis exposed the limits of Britain’s position as a member of the European Union. When David Cameron then tried to resolve the problem of EU membership through a referendum he made it extremely difficult to defend the City’s broader commercial interests in the Single European Market because freedom of movement issues weighed significantly more in British domestic politics than financial services.     

Institutions and Labour Market Performance in Western Europe

Labour market institutions in most European countries are caught mid-stream between flexibility and coordination. On the one hand, most countries fail to capture the positive externalities that may arise from the mutual interdependence of institutions and ground level labour market behaviour. Productive and commercial changes make it exceptionally difficult to create such coordination arrangements. At the same time, there has not been a widespread rejection of labour market institutions. This can be seen in the cautious and pragmatic manner with which most European countries approach the themes of flexibility and deregulation. The common pattern has been to mesh flexibility and regulation. Thus whilst institutions still matter their role should not be overstated. In many ways, a governance gap is emerging in the European labour market.     

Politics and Markets in the Irish 'Celtic Tiger'

Ireland's rate of growth and employment creation during the 1990s far outstripped economic performance in the rest of the OECD. Competing explanations are available in accounting for these outcomes, one stressing the primacy of the market, the other focusing on political choice. A case is made for the importance of politics, particularly the successful strategic adaptation to the challenges and opportunities afforded by the completion of the Single European Market during the 1990s. Ireland, as a small open economy, needs to combine effective external adjustment with appropriate domestic adjustment policies. Two policy areas are chosen for particular attention: industrial development strategy, and social partnership arrangements. This experience has implications beyond the Irish case, as the new central European and Baltic EU member states face similar challenges of policy adaptation.     

Blurring or Shifting of Policy Frames?: Institutionalization of the Economic-Environmental Policy Linkage in the European Community

This article investigates how "policy frames" have shaped the way European Community actors perceive the policy linkage between market integration and environmental policy. The article contends that there are three Community policy frames: conditional, classic, and sustainability. They form alternative "packages" of policy ideas defining the relationship between economic and environmental policy. The article provides an analysis of how actors embed these frames in the Community's institutional framework.To illustrate the general impact of policy frames on the environmental arena, the article explores two cases: waste management policy, and the integration of environmental concerns into the Community's agricultural policy. The article concludes by highlighting the different factors that promote and undermine the formation of "thick" institutional structures likely to integrate environmental and economic policy objectives.     

Environmental Impact Analysis (EIA) : Origins, Evolution, and Future Directions

The technique of environmental impact analysis (EIA) was developed initially in the United States in response to a requirement of the National 15nvironmental Policy Act of 1969. Now adopted with variations in at least 3 0 countries antf by the European Community, EIA has proved to be a va1ua't)le component of a group of related techniques for discovering and projectirig the probable consequences of proposed action. In pursuit of iriprovenicnt in analytic technique, however, the policy rationale for EIA has too oftcii been obscured. EIA depends for full effectiveness upon in- tcgration into the policy-making process. Separated from commitment to environmental policy objectives, El.4 IS at risk of becoming redundant paperwork.     

Regulatory change and environmental protection in the British and German chemical industries

Abstract. Business interest associations in the European chemical industry have traditionally been well organized and enjoyed a harmonious relationship with governments of various complexions. This very favourable balance for the industry has been disturbed by the salience of the environmental issue. This has led to a certain deregulation, or breakdown of existing regulatory mechanisms. Increasing concentration on the European Community level as the locus of environmental policymaking has led to a dual response on the part of business interest associations, reflecting an older contrast between national styles of government/business relations. The British chemical industry has preferred the national route, is much more hostile to environmental regulation than its German counterpart, and often finds itself isolated, depending on the Department of Trade and Industry to ensure that its viewpoint is articulated by the British Government in EC negotiations. The German industry still clings to self-regulation, but, given the high level of environmental consciousness in the Federal Republic, has developed a reluctant preference for action at the European level. This has been manifested both in the Europeanisation of its links with the German Economics Ministry and in its support for the European Council of Chemical Manufacturers Associations; the latter is well placed to exert influence on both the EC Commission and the European Parliament.     

Corporate interests and public affairs: organised business–government relations in EU member states

The internationalisation of economic and political affairs changes the way in which business interests are brought to bear on public policy. This is a global phenomenon but can, in particular, be observed in Europe. The construction of the European Union, the development of the Single Market and the build‐up of the policy institutions to go with it, together change business–government relations profoundly. This paper answers the question of how organised business interests relate to government agencies and political institutions. By using the example of trade associations in the Netherlands and Germany, the paper shows that, despite the internationalisation of public affairs in Europe, the national political level remains strategically important for the representation of business interests. The paper thus argues that changes in European business–government relations are institutionally embedded at both the European and the national level. The implication for future research is that much of the dynamics of economic and political internationalisation materialises within the domestic arrangements of interest politics. Copyright © 2004 Henry Stewart Publications     

Corporate interests and public affairs: organised business–government relations in EU member states

The internationalisation of economic and political affairs changes the way in which business interests are brought to bear on public policy. This is a global phenomenon but can, in particular, be observed in Europe. The construction of the European Union, the development of the Single Market and the build‐up of the policy institutions to go with it, together change business–government relations profoundly. This paper answers the question of how organised business interests relate to government agencies and political institutions. By using the example of trade associations in the Netherlands and Germany, the paper shows that, despite the internationalisation of public affairs in Europe, the national political level remains strategically important for the representation of business interests. The paper thus argues that changes in European business–government relations are institutionally embedded at both the European and the national level. The implication for future research is that much of the dynamics of economic and political internationalisation materialises within the domestic arrangements of interest politics. Copyright © 2004 Henry Stewart Publications     

Citizenship—the real democratic deficit of the European union? 1

Given the pressures of globalisation, the nation state is limited in its control over public policy agendas, particularly in the field of social policy. The response of domestic governments to the heat of international competition has been to create more flexible, post‐welfare state economies. A significant consequence of this development is the removal of social rights and the acceleration of social exclusion. This gap which has opened up could be filled by the European Union, but it has so far failed to take a leading role in this regard.

So, as European citizens we should be concerned that the forces which operate to balance the harsher effects of the free market have been lost at the European, supranational level. There are three central reasons why this is the case: (1) the European Union consists of 15 member states with competing, historically rooted understandings of social protection and, therefore, social rights; (2) defining social rights is traditionally a state‐derived function and as such, the absence of an EU state means the absence of comprehensive citizen protection; (3) these two factors are magnified by the relative weakness of the supranational institutions and democratic deficit between the key EU institutions (weak vis‐à‐vis member state governments and with regard to the supremacy of the market).

The combination of these problems has meant that the European Union has not taken the primary role in providing the kind of social protection that we used to enjoy in the domestic context. The result of this is a situation in which the market is determining both the level and even the kind of rights that we are entitled to, thus we are citizens of a European market and not of a European state.

As a state‐derived function, and without a European state, social and citizen rights are being neglected. As a consequence, unless citizen protection is developed through an intergovernmental or supranational framework, it is difficult to see how governments can honour their responsibility to safeguard their people.     

Focal Points in Public Policy: Evidence from Voluntary Regulation

Numerous studies argue that law affects behavior “expressively”—such as when states create focal points that overcome the coordination difficulties firms face. We argue that governments help firms overcome coordination dilemmas by explicating a preferred strategy for firms weighing investment in voluntary regulation. Firms would prefer to coordinate on a common strategy as a way of reducing the costs of voluntary regulation and increasing its benefits. We test our hypothesis about the efficacy of focal point selection with the European Union's (EU) advocacy of the Eco‐Management and Audit Scheme (EMAS) over a rival environmental management system, International Standards Organization (ISO) 14001. EU nations have statistically significantly lower rates of ISO 14001 certification than comparable countries at least in part due to their advocacy of EMAS. These results emphasize the role the state plays in coordinating business behavior even when such policy is simply expressive.     

Regulation in Comparative Perspective

Structural changes in the world economy pose challenging new problems for comparative policy analysis. One such problem is the harmonization of domestic policies and institutions, which the Uruguay Round of GATT negotiations has identified as a key principle of international economic relations. Harmonization may mean the creation of a single policy space out of a number of distinct jurisdictions. It can also mean the adoption of common policy goals or general principles that national governments can pursue by different strategies. Comparative analysis can help in choosing the type of harmonization most appropriate in a given context. This article analyzes the development of harmonization strategies in the European Community/European Union. The European experience shows that far-reaching economic integration can be achieved without suppressing cultural diversity and legitimate differences in national preferences.     

Subsidiarity and ecologically based taxation: A european constitutional perspective

The principle of subsidiarity through its re-affirmation in the Treaty of Maastricht became an integral and central part of European constitutional law. Its relationship to ecological issues, however, has so far not been explored. Subsidiarity is a general principle of organization. It can apply to all areas of policy: financial, agricultural, technological, education, defense, economic development and, e.g. environmental policy. The principle of subsidiarity is silent about the specific purpose, direction or content of a particular policy. Whatever be the purpose of any such policy, the principle of subsidiarity requires that it be carried out within that context which is the smallest viable one in which the objective can successfully be attained. When a task is too complicated for a small unit such as an office or a firm to be successfully performed, that unit has to be augmanted to the point where the task can be effectively performed. Likewise, if an organization is too large to successfully handle particular problems as its procedure may be too cumbersome or as it lacks sufficient detailed information or experience repeated recurrences of problems it has tried to settle, then a different organizational form must be found, preferably an existing one, which is closer to the problem at hand and able to carry out the policy. With the shift in responsibility will also travel the access to resources with which to carry out the task. Since ecological units rarely co-incide with political units, the principle of subsidiarity poses a specific challenge to politicians and administrators who have to decide on assignments of tasks and responsibilities as well as funding within the different echelons and among the different Member States of the European Union. This essay explores those tasks and, in particular, advances the notion of establishing ecological tax units.     

Policy Developments for Workplace Gender Equity in a Global Era: The Importance of the EU in the UK

abstract This article asks whether attempts to achieve gender equity in the workplace are limited by globalization. On the one hand, globalization has been seen to curtail ambitions for equity in employment because of the increased power of global capital as compared with labor, including within the state. On the other hand, there are two counter tendencies. One is the modernization of the gender regime, which has restructured gender inequalities and developed new political constituencies among women, and the other is the development of new polities, in particular the European Union, in response to the perceived challenge of globalization. I investigate the impact of these crosscutting changes on policies aimed at gender equity in the workplace in the UK. I consider data on changes in gender equity in the workplace and developments in employment policy, especially increased education and the changing regulation of working time and equal opportunities policies. The article concludes that globalization does not lead to the weakening of all polities, that the EU has become increasingly powerful in the context of globalization, and that despite the weakening of labor, the increased education of women and the increased articulation of women's political voices has led to improvements in some dimensions of the position of some women in employment.     

Representation and the democratic deficit

In the early years of the Community it was assumed that there was a widespread consensus about the future development of Europe, and that decisions by the Council of Ministers were broadly in line with public opinion. In recent years the growth in the powers and responsibilities of European institutions has been considerable, through the Single European Act and the Maastricht Treaty. The Community is now the world's largest trading group, and one of the three most important players on the world economic scene alongside the USA and Japan. The EU has grown from six to fifteen member states, and further waves of enlargement are on the horizon. Yet many fear that processes of representation and accountability have not kept pace with this expansion, producing a legitimacy crisis (Anderson & Eliassen 1996; Hayward 1995). The key issue addressed throughout this Special Issue is the classic one of political representation: how the preferences of European citizens can be linked to decision making within the European Union.     

Representation and the democratic deficit

Abstract In the early years of the Community it was assumed that there was a widespread consensus about the future development of Europe, and that decisions by the Council of Ministers were broadly in line with public opinion. In recent years the growth in the powers and responsibilities of European institutions has been considerable, through the Single European Act and the Maastricht Treaty. The Community is now the world's largest trading group, and one of the three most important players on the world economic scene alongside the USA and Japan. The EU has grown from six to fifteen member states, and further waves of enlargement are on the horizon. Yet many fear that processes of representation and accountability have not kept pace with this expansion, producing a legitimacy crisis (Anderson & Eliassen 1996; Hayward 1995). The key issue addressed throughout this Special Issue is the classic one of political representation: how the preferences of European citizens can be linked to decision making within the European Union.